I can recall my 1969 Pontiac Le Mans 3-speed manual tranny. You had to depress the clutch pedal to the floor in order to crank the engine. Even that far back, GM had foreseen some bozo trying to start his car while it was in gear.

That being said, just how idiot-proof do car designers have to make their vehicles? How is this any different than some jerk actuating the starter by jumpering the solenoid with his head under the hood and the tranny in gear? Would Volvo be held similarly responsible had this happened with a 1974 Model 142, which was my first Volvo and had a 4-speed manual.

Consider another lawsuit. This time a 1985 740 wagon with a safety interlock installed stalls on the railroad crossing. The driver panics, forgets that he cannot start the engine while in gear, and is killed or injured by the collision with the train. I bet his lawyer would be suing Volvo for installing this evil interlock, which prevented his client from starting his car and, thus, avoiding injury.

I am sorry that the guy lost his leg, but it is difficult to see how Volvo could be held even partially responsible for his recklessness. Volvo got sued because the plaintiff's lawyer knew who had the deep pockets and a reputation to protect. This brings us to tort reform and similar lawsuits for medical malpractice. But that belongs on another forum.