In 2001, six people were in a 1995 Ford Aerostar driving from LA to Las Vegas when a twice-patched tire blew out. The van lost control, and flipped, killing one passenger, and paralyzing plaintiff Fidelia Pillado. This was, she said, Ford’s fault, but a jury didn’t buy her theory that her seatbelt failed without any physical evidence of damage to the seatbelt, or that the suspension was broken before the tire blew out. A roof defect claim also went nowhere. She had sought $18 million in compensatory and punitive damages. (Chuck Mueller, “Jury clears Ford in crash”, San Bernandino Sun, Jan. 13).
Related posts
In autos
Was there a postal workers convention during jury selection or something? This must be a first.
As I’ve previously noted, Ford wins the vast majority of rollover cases. These are lottery litigation suits that trial lawyers bring because they expect profit from a small probability of winning a big award if the jury makes a mistake (often at the encouragement of the judge when that does happen).
Ted,
“Ford wins the vast majority of rollover cases”
I did not know that, but I did know that the Pinto was as safe as any other small car. This is good news.
You brightened my day.