Nevada 2018 Chevrolet truck crash leaves Allie Mead with major injuries blamed on the lap belt

July 11, 2026 — General Motors must confront a second trial involving Allie Mead, who was riding in a 1998 Chevrolet truck.

A Las Vegas jury sided with GM in late 2025, but the judge has now ordered a new trial for Mead.

During August 2018 near 2:00 a.m., Allie Mead sat in the rear center seat of the truck that struck a boulder and a tree. She wore the seat belt yet sustained serious injuries from the impact.

She attributes those injuries to the lap-only belt that kept her positioned during the crash. This 2-point restraint differs from a 3-point belt that adds a shoulder strap across the chest.

The lawsuit states GM should have fitted a 3-point seat belt in the 1998 Chevy truck.

Mead alleges the belt featured a negligent and improper design that produced her serious injuries. She further claims GM failed to warn her about the asserted defect.

Judge Tara Clark Newberry let the case proceed through the courts for five years until trial at the Eighth Judicial District Court in Las Vegas.

General Motors maintained the 2-point lap belt was not defective because it met or surpassed all required safety standards that did not mandate a 3-point rear belt in the 1998 model.

The Las Vegas jury also heard GM explain that any part of a legal vehicle can cause injury in a severe crash, whether a seat belt, steering wheel or mirror. Yet the fact that a part can injure someone does not prove it defective or unsafe.

General Motors told the jury that Mead's rear center belt worked as intended by keeping her in place and stopping ejection from the truck.

Mead requested the jury award at least $65 million, but the panel found GM owed nothing because the rear seat belt was not defective.

Mead's lawyers argued the verdict was tainted after GM counsel ignored key judge instructions. The judge agreed and granted a new trial.

According to Judge Tara Clark Newberry:

"When counsel deliberately violates orders, invents facts, misstates the record and substitutes inadmissible scientific conclusions for missing expert testimony, no series of curative instructions can undo the damage."

The case is Allie Mead v. General Motors, LLC, Case No. A-20-813945-C.