Bridgestone/firestone, Inc., F/k/a the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Petitioner v. Marilyn Glyn-Jones, David…

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court held that Texas Revised Civil Statute art. 6701d, §107C(j) does not bar introduction of evidence that a plaintiff was wearing a seat belt, and therefore reversed the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Bridgestone/Firestone, remanding for further proceedings. The Court based its decision on a contextual interpretation of the statute, finding the legislature did not intend to shield seat‑belt manufacturers from products‑liability claims. A dissent argued the provision should be read to preclude only evidence of non‑use and criticized the majority for rewriting the statute. A concurring opinion agreed with the result but warned against expanding statutory construction beyond the plain language.