The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled this week that a man injured in an automobile accident after his seatbelt failed could sue General Motors (GM) for "defective design." Attorneys representing the plaintiff argued that the seatbelt was more dangerous than the average consumer would expect. But GM attorneys contended that the "consumer expectations" test did not apply because the average consumer was not knowledgeable of the complex technical design of the seatbelt. Supreme Court members disagreed, ruling that a "seatbelt is a familiar product whose basic function is understood by the general population."