If you’re ever injured in a car accident, you have a better chance of receiving restitution for your injuries, thanks to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling late last week, and Chicago personal injury firm Romanucci & Blandin applauds the ruling.

The court held that a federal regulation that gives carmakers the option of installing either lap belts or lap-and-shoulder belts in rear-inner seats does not preempt state law.

In reaching this result, and by correcting the misreading of a previous case, the court has deprived car manufacturers of one of their most readily used defenses to avoid liability. At the same time, the court gave car accident victims a chance to hold wrongdoers accountable while also showing the important role the tort system plays in promoting public safety.

The ruling grew out of a case, Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., in which a California family sued for the death of Thanh Williamson, who died eight and a half years ago in a car crash. The unanimous Supreme Court ruling held that the family of accident victims, in this case her husband and daughter, had the right to seek compensation from automakers for personal injuries caused by their vehicles’ lack of shoulder harnesses.

The case stems from an accident on August 14, 2002, in which the Williamson family was traveling in a Mazda minivan. The mother, Thanh, was seated in the middle row. Coming in the opposite direction was an RV, towing a Jeep Wrangler. The Jeep came loose from the RV, crossed over into the Williamsons’ lane, and crashed into them. Ms. Williamson’s body jackknifed around the seatbelt, which had only a lap belt. She sustained severe abdominal injuries and internal bleeding, which later proved to be fatal.

Public Justice has been involved in the case for many years. The organization submitted an amicus brief emphasizing that lower courts had badly misapplied a prior case. They urged the high court to resolve the massive confusion it had caused. The Supreme Court did so.