If you selected DRI NON-MEMBER MEMBERSHIP BUNDLE, you will receive a trial DRI Individual Membership, valid through February 28, 2025. By selecting "yes" below, you are confirming that representing personal injury claimants is not the majority of your legal practice.

If you selected the DRI TRIAL MEMBERSHIP BUNDLE, please include your First Bar Date and State; Bar Number. (02/01/1999, IL.  Bar #: 1234567)

Please provide the name/firm of the DRI member that referred you, along with any DRI Referring Committee (If applicable).

Join colleagues and friends at selected restaurants for dinner (on your own).
Sign up for Dine-Arounds

Join us bright and early on the morning of Thursday, September 19, 2024, for the DRI For Life Chicago River and Lake Run/Walk. Our 3.5-mile route will take us down to the Chicago River Walk, out to the shores of Lake Michigan, to the softball fields just south of Grant Park (made famous by Rob Lowe and Demi Moore in About Last Night ...!), over to Michigan Avenue, and through the South Loop back up to the Hyatt Regency. We will meet in the lobby of the Hyatt at 6:45 a.m. for a 7:00 a.m. departure.

It has been nearly 25 years since the implementation of the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act in the United States, which was implemented with an eye towards giving NHTSA early insight into possible safety issues. TREAD requires vehicle and equipment manufacturers to report to NHTSA on a wide variety of information that could indicate the existence of a potential safety defect or noncompliance and to advise NHTSA of foreign safety recalls and other safety campaigns. Transport Canada plans to introduce Analysis of Companies’ Technical Information for Vehicle and Equipment (ACTIVE), an early warning defect and incident reporting regime similar to TREAD. What does a quarter century of experience with TREAD tell us about early warning regulations? Has TREAD actually lead to increased numbers of recalls and how has it impacted litigation? How has TREAD reporting impacted in-house counsel? Just how similar are TREAD and ACTIVE, and what should counsel have in mind with the implementation of ACTIVE?

As a result of the passing of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill (BIL) in 2021, NHTSA will begin to require all “light passenger motor vehicles”, to have Forward Collision Warning (FCW), AEB (Automatic Emergency Braking) and PAEB (Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking), for model year 2029 vehicles. “AEB systems reduce the frequency and severity of lead vehicle and pedestrian collisions. They employ sensor technologies and subsystems that work together to sense when the vehicle is in a crash imminent situation, to automatically apply the vehicle brakes if the driver has not done so, and to apply more braking force to supplement the driver's braking. These systems can reduce both lead vehicle rear-end (lead vehicle AEB) and pedestrian (PAEB) crashes. AEB systems have reached a level of maturity to make a significant contribution to reducing the frequency and severity of crashes and are thus ready to be mandated through adoption of a new FMVSS on all new light vehicles”- United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2023). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NHTSA [Web Archive]. This presentation will explore the 2029 requirements in two parts. The first being an overview of the AEB, FCW and PAEB technology being mandated, how it works, and how these technologies will apply to accident reconstruction and litigated automotive claims. The second part will overview the specific requirements of how the technology is going to be tested and validated, what equipment and specifications will be required to pass these new tests, and examples of what these test scenarios look like.

In our rapidly evolving and highly competitive market, diversity and inclusion brings a range of perspectives and experiences that drive innovation and improve the overall performance of a company. To better understand customers and maintain a productive and agile workforce, automotive companies must attract and retain top talent that reflects the make-up of our society. From improving product design and developing stronger customer relationships to increasing market share and improved financial performance, the benefits of strategic diversity and inclusion initiatives are clear. This discussion will identify steps that the automotive sector can take to bolster inclusion efforts.

Pan Asian Lunch Buffet

• Asian Chopped Salad (gf, vg)
• Egg Rolls with Sweet and Sour Sauce (df, vg)
• Kung Pao Chicken (df)
• Beef Short Ribs with Scallion Ginger and Gochujang BBQ Sauce (gf, df)
• Vegetable Lo Mein with Shitake Mushrooms, Napa Cabbage, Carrots and Bean Sprouts (df, v)
• Spicy Green Beans (gf, df, v)
• Coconut Rice Pudding (df, vg)

The right to repair movement continues to pose unique challenges for the automotive industry. From a consumer’s perspective, the right to repair is deceptively simple – I purchased the product so I am entitled to repair it myself or to take it to a technician of my own choosing for repairs. But there are significant differences between automobile and consumer electronics, for example, that have driven a different conversation about the right-to-repair for automobiles. Automakers also face significantly different product liability risks and warranty issues requiring a more nuanced analysis of the right to repair. The increasing complexity of the technology in automobiles has also made repairing them more difficult and costlier. This has become particularly pronounced with the growth of software within vehicles and their connectivity. This panel will discuss the history of the right to repair within the automotive industry, its current positioning within the intersecting conversations surrounding environmentalism, ESG, consumer rights, and how automakers have (and can) address the challenges ahead.

This seminar explores how experts investigate motor vehicle collisions when liability is contested, such as pedestrian collisions and high-speed intersection collisions. We answer questions such as how do we typically respond to various roadway hazards? How long does it take us to respond? What are the limitations of human factors, driver behavior, traffic engineering research? How do experts determine if a collision was (un)avoidable? We will also go over several, peer-reviewed published research (including our own) that de-bunks myths about typical perception-reaction time for pedestrians, cyclists, and intersection collisions. Lastly, we will explore a few case examples where this type of analysis was used and provided tremendous insight and leverage from a liability perspective.

Step outside the seminar venue for an afternoon stroll with colleagues on the Riverwalk. Take in the sights of the city along the picturesque Chicago River. Enjoy time with new connections and admire the public art, explore the marina, stop for a coffee and ice cream, or visit the McCormick Bridgehouse & Chicago River Museum.

Join colleagues and friends at selected restaurants for dinner (on your own).
Sign up for Dine-Arounds

Join fellow women in the law attendees from Strictly Automotive and Senior Living and Long-Term Care Seminars for a chance to connect over tea, coffee, and small breakfast bites. We hope you’ll join us for this networking opportunity and leave having made lasting connections. Looking forward to seeing you there!

Many "blanket" supply agreements in the automotive industry provide that the buyer will specify the quantity to be delivered only by issuing periodic "releases." In July 2023, the Michigan Supreme Court held for the first time that such a "release-by-release" contract is not enforceable beyond the quantity specified in issued releases, and therefore can be terminated by either party. Hear from in-house counsel from a supplier and an OEM, as well as external counsel working in the space, about the implications of this decision one year out and how the law is continuing to evolve.

In motor vehicle collisions with frontal airbag deployment, injuries are sometimes attributed to contact with the airbag and claims sometimes arise regarding the aggressiveness of airbag deployment. While ATDs, or "crash test dummies", are widely used to understand occupant motions and loading in motor vehicle collisions, the traditional Hybrid III ATD does not provide data on facial or eye loading. Using tools like the FOCUS (Facial and Ocular CountermeasUre Safety) headform, the forces applied to discrete regions of the face and eyes can be quantified in impact scenarios. This testing has been used in research and in litigation contexts to understand if and how facial fractures or eye injuries occurred and whether an airbag impact is the likely cause of such injuries. This presentation will include a discussion of what these methods can and cannot do and how they can be employed to evaluate and litigate airbag claims.

Since courts resumed jury trials after the COVID shutdown, juries seem willing to award larger damages amounts than ever before. Juror viewpoints and attitudes have evolved since the pandemic, and damages awards seem to be disconnected from the proofs presented at trial. Trial counsel must be prepared to address these challenges during discovery and, most importantly, at trial. Inhouse counsel must ensure their outside counsel is developing a case narrative during discovery and employing effective strategies during trial to mitigate the risk of a runaway verdict. Join us for a moderated panel discussion between a highly experienced trial judge, veteran inhouse counsel and seasoned national trial counsel as they discuss these changing juror attitudes and best practices to address them during case work up and at trial.