— A Kia theft lawsuit that was filed over the death of Ohio resident Matthew P. Moshi will have another day in court after a 2-1 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
In November 2023, 36-year-old Matthew Moshi was driving a 2009 Honda Civic when a stolen and speeding 2018 Kia Optima ran a stop sign at the intersection of Beacon Hill Road and Hilliard Rome Road.
The stolen Optima crashed into the Honda Civic, killing Mr. Moshi.
The Kia Optima was driven by a 15-year-old who stole the car in Columbus, Ohio, with the driver and his three teen passengers running from the police when the car crashed into the Honda Civic.
Mr. Moshi's family blamed Kia for his death, claiming the car had several safety defects and wasn't equipped with an engine immobilizer. The lawsuit alleges the stolen Kia Optima had a defective steering column, defective ignition lock cylinder and an exposed ignition switch.
Kia's argument was simple. The automaker said there was nothing defective about the 2018 Kia Optima which met or exceeded all federal safety standards. The automaker placed the blame on the teen who stole the Optima which killed Matthew Moshi.
The automaker also referenced previous legal decisions in Ohio.
"But unbroken Ohio caselaw, including two Ohio Supreme Court decisions, holds that a car thief’s independent decision to drive dangerously supersedes any earlier steps in the causal chain and stands alone as the sole proximate cause of any resulting accident."
Kia also told the judge about a separate but nearly identical stolen Kia lawsuit filed in Ohio and eventually dismissed.
“[A]s a matter of law, the theft and subsequent reckless operation of the Kia Sportage involved in Plaintiff’s accident constitute an intervening, superseding cause that breaks the chain of causation with respect to Defendant Kia.” — Fox v. Kia
The district court judge agreed with Kia and dismissed the Matthew Moshi wrongful death lawsuit.
Kia Theft Lawsuit Appeal
The plaintiffs appealed the district court dismissal, and a 2-1 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit will change everything now and in the future as courts rule car thefts are caused by automakers, not by criminals who break into and steal those cars.
According to the Sixth Circuit, Hyundai and Kia should have prophetically seen years ago that not equipping vehicles with immobilizers would one day allow teenage criminals to break the windows, destroy the steering columns, remove the ignition locks, steal the vehicles and kill innocent people.
The reasoning may be considered absurd because engine immobilizers are not required in the U.S., and each year the most stolen vehicles in the country are equipped with immobilizers.
A current class action lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler involves millions of vehicles that can be stolen by criminals who break the windows and allegedly use key programmers to steal the vehicles. All the stolen Chrysler vehicles were equipped with engine immobilizers.
The Matthew Moshi theft lawsuit had been dismissed by the Ohio district court based on previous court rulings which found “a car owner’s failure to secure a car against theft does not render the owner liable for injuries caused by a thief’s negligent driving.”
But according to the appeals court, this has nothing to do with the automakers which designed and built the vehicles. The 2–1 decision shows how state laws and even previous court rulings can mean one thing to one judge and something completely different to another judge.
The appeals court ruled Hyundai and Kia should have known there is a connection between vehicle thefts and crashes in Ohio.
However, the dissenting judge ruled in favor of Kia by finding negligence on the part of the criminals, not the automaker.
Hyundai/Kia Theft Lawsuits — The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
At least 20 states and multiple cities blamed Hyundai and Kia for the thefts instead of blaming the teenage criminals in those cities and states.
Both automakers insisted there was nothing defective about their vehicles, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration agreed after federal safety regulators investigated the Hyundai and Kia vehicles. NHTSA concluded there was nothing wrong with the vehicles regarding a lack of engine immobilizers.
NHTSA emphasized engine immobilizers are not required in the U.S., and said, "the safety risk arises from unsafe use of a motor vehicle by an unauthorized person after taking significant destructive actions to parts of the vehicle."
And while hundreds of lawsuits claimed the vehicles violated federal safety standards, NHTSA disagreed and said federal regulations do not "contemplate actions taken by criminal actors to break open or remove part of the steering column and take out the ignition lock to start a vehicle."
The stolen Kia Optima lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Eastern Division): Estate of Matthew P. Moshi v. Kia America, Inc.
The plaintiff is represented by Scott W. Schiff & Associates Co., LPA.
Read about other lawsuits that blame Hyundai and Kia for deaths and injuries due to stolen vehicles.