Honorable Kris Mayes
Arizona Attorney General’s Office
2005 N Central
Ave
Phoenix,
AZ85004
Subject: Request for Assistance and Intervention Regarding
FCA Chrysler’s Defective AHR Systems
Dear Attorney General Mayes,
I am writing to request your office's assistance and
potential intervention in a matter of significant public safety and financial
interest to the State of Arizona.
I have initiated legal action against FCA Chrysler and its supplier, Grammer
Industries, for injuries caused by the defective Active Head Restraint (AHR)
system in my 2017 Jeep Patriot. A draft of my complaint is enclosed for your
review.
Summary of Case and State Interests
The AHR system, designed to reduce whiplash injuries in rear-end collisions,
has a well-documented defect that causes unintended deployments due to
environmental stress cracking (ESC). This defect poses significant risks to Arizona residents,
particularly as aging vehicles become increasingly susceptible to malfunctions.
My injuries, including a traumatic brain injury (TBI), PTSD and spinal trauma,
were directly caused by this defect.
Despite the severity of my injuries, I have faced significant challenges
securing legal representation for this case. The high costs associated with
pursuing product liability claims against a major corporation like FCA Chrysler
have made it difficult for me to find an attorney willing to take the case.
This highlights the inequity in access to justice for individuals harmed by
corporate negligence.
Moreover, while FCA Chrysler avoided a recall in Costa v. FCA by
extending the warranty for affected AHR systems, the jury found FCA guilty of
engaging in unfair acts or practices against consumers. This verdict
underscores a troubling pattern of behavior by FCA and reinforces the urgency
of addressing this issue to protect Arizona
residents and taxpayers.
Arizona’s
Medicaid program (AHCCCS) has funded some of my medical treatments in
conjunction with Medicare, which would not have been necessary but for FCA
Chrysler’s negligence. This creates a substantial financial interest for the
state in recovering these costs under federal and state Medicaid third-party
liability laws. Furthermore, the ongoing risks to Arizona consumers warrant your office's
attention as a matter of public safety.
Requests for Action
I respectfully request your office consider the following
actions to support the interests of Arizona
residents and taxpayers:
1. Subrogation Claim for
Medicaid Recovery:
File a claim to
recover Medicaid funds expended for my treatments, as permitted under federal
Medicaid law (42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(25)) and Arizona law. This action could hold FCA
Chrysler accountable for the financial burden placed on the state due to their
defective product.
2. Amicus Curiae
Brief:
Submit an amicus
curiae brief in support of my case, emphasizing the state’s financial interest
and the broader public safety concerns posed by the defective AHR system. Such
a brief could also highlight the systemic risks to Arizona consumers and the need for judicial
remedies.
3. Public Nuisance
Action:
Consider filing a
public nuisance claim against FCA Chrysler, arguing that defective AHR systems
in vehicles sold or used in Arizona
constitute a continuing hazard to public safety. This could include seeking
injunctive relief to compel FCA Chrysler to notify and repair affected
vehicles.
4. Consumer Fraud Investigation:
Initiate an
investigation under the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act (A.R.S. § 44-1522) to
address FCA Chrysler’s failure to adequately disclose the risks of AHR defects
to Arizona
consumers. This could support enforcement actions to protect residents from
future harm.
5. Statewide Injunctive
Relief:
Advocate for
measures that protect all Arizona
vehicle owners, such as mandatory inspections, repairs, or monitoring programs
for vehicles at risk of unintended AHR deployment.
6. Independent Polling to Assess Consumer Awareness:
I respectfully request that your office consider conducting an independent poll
or survey of Arizona
vehicle owners to evaluate consumer awareness regarding the risks associated
with Active Head Restraint (AHR) systems. Based on my extensive personal
outreach efforts, I have found that almost no one, aside from one individual,
was aware of the potential for these devices to deploy unexpectedly. I believe
such polling could provide valuable data to validate the widespread lack of
awareness among consumers and highlight the need for targeted public safety
measures.
This initiative could reveal gaps in consumer knowledge stemming from FCA
Chrysler’s failure to provide adequate warnings and would support the case for
stronger consumer protection efforts. It may also help identify at-risk
populations and inform strategies for ensuring Arizona drivers and passengers are protected
from similar injuries.
7. Examination of FCA Chrysler’s Retaliatory Practices
Request the AG investigate whether FCA Chrysler’s minimal “donation” offer was
intended to dismiss or undermine the Plaintiff’s public advocacy. The framing
of this offer as a donation, rather than a settlement, suggests an attempt to
minimize liability while discouraging public discussion of the issue. This
practice could potentially discourage other injured consumers from coming
forward.
Conclusion
This case is not only a matter of personal injury but also a
public safety and financial issue for the State of Arizona. I believe your office’s involvement
could help ensure accountability and prevent further harm to Arizona residents while safeguarding
taxpayer funds.
Enclosed, you will find the current draft of my legal
complaint for your reference. Please feel free to contact me for additional
details or supporting documents. I would be happy to discuss this matter
further with your office.
Thank you for your attention to this important issue.
Sincerely,
Emory Caudill
**Enclosures:**
1. Draft Complaint: *Pro Per Complaint – Emory B. Caudill
III v. FCA Chrysler and Grammer Industries*
