Overlawyered » Ford Motor

November 21 roundup

Walter Olson — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 05:14:12 +0000

Spanish government fines filmmaker for movie poster showing “reckless driving” [Lowering the Bar] Siri, distracted driving, and police discretion [Balko]
Parents taking care of their kids under Michigan program must pay $30/mo. to SEIU for representation [Joel Gehrke, Examiner]
Stretching the Fifth: Joe Francis bad deposition behavior [Legal Ethics Forum]
WaPo covers deep split on Consumer Product Safety Commission, left wants fifth seat filled ASAP;
“Threat to Student Due Process Rights Dropped from Draft of Violence Against Women Act” [FIRE, background; Cathy Young/Reason]
After $300K donation from Philadelphia trial lawyers, you may call him “Judge Wecht” [AP/WPVI]
Court reverses $43M Madison County verdict against Ford [AP/Alton Telegraph, some background]

Tags: CPSC, Ford Motor, labor unions, Pennsylvania, Spain, traffic laws

July 19 roundup

Walter Olson — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:52:12 +0000

More on CPSC’s crib ban train wreck [Commissioner Anne Northup, more, earlier]
One man’s nightmare of false accusation [LA Times via PoL]
How many plaintiff’s-side flicks is HBO going to air this summer, anyway? ["Mann v. Ford," Abnormal Use]
Apple granted “incredibly broad patent” over screen gesture technology [Tabarrok]
Will Congress reverse this term’s much-attacked SCOTUS decisions? [Alison Frankel] Podcast on Wal-Mart v. Dukes with Brian Fitzpatrick [Fed Soc] “Wal-Mart ruling no knock-out blow for class actions” [Reuters] Contrary to some assertions, current law does strongly incentivize individual job-bias claims [Bader] More on case: Dan Bushell, and welcome Craig Newmark readers.
Mississippi stops proceedings in $322 million asbestos case to consider judge’s possible conflict [JCL, earlier here, here]
Nice coat, where’dja get it? [annals of incompetent crime, UK Daily Mail]

Tags: CPSC, environment, Ford Motor, Mississippi, patent law, recusals, Wal-Mart v. Dukes

Why U-Haul won’t rent trailers for Ford Explorers

Walter Olson — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 05:14:42 +0000

“Every time we go to hire an attorney to defend a lawsuit, as soon as we say ‘Ford Explorer,’ they charge us more money,” explains a company spokeswoman. Today’s Explorer is based on a design entirely different from the model that attracted rollover litigation in the 1990s, which doesn’t seem to matter. [Edward Niedermeyer, Truth About Cars]

Tags: autos, Ford Explorer, Ford Motor

Update: Branham v. Ford

Ted Frank — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 05:37:13 +0000

In 2006, I wrote:

In May 2001, Cheryl Jane Hale was driving four children to a sleepover in her 1987 Ford Bronco. She didn’t bother to have the children wear their seat belts, so, when she took her eyes off the road to argue with the backseat passengers, and thus drove off the road and flipped the car, 12-year-old Jesse Branham was thrown from the car and suffered brain damage. A jury in Hampton County, South Carolina (the second jury to be impaneled—the first one was dismissed in a mistrial when it was discovered after two weeks of trial that five of the jurors were former clients of Branham’s lawyers) decided that this was only 45% Hale’s fault, held Ford 55% responsible, which puts Ford entirely on the hook for $31 million in damages.

On Monday, the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed because of prejudicial closing arguments that relied heavily on inadmissible evidence. More importantly for lawyers practicing in South Carolina, the Court adopted “the risk-utility test with its requirement of showing a feasible alternative design.”

How bad of a judicial hellhole is Hampton County? Though Hale was a co-defendant, she cooperated with the plaintiffs throughout the trial in their case against Ford, even sitting at the plaintiffs’ table; but because the judge classified Hale as a co-defendant, it meant that Hale got half of the peremptory challenges of the “defense.” More from Comer; no press coverage that I’ve seen yet. (cross-posted from Point of Law)

Tags: autos, closing arguments, Ford Motor, joint and several liability, jury selection, personal responsibility, problem jurisdictions, product liability, seatbelts, South Carolina, SUVs

March 16 roundup

Ted Frank — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:22:39 +0000

Are you a member of Tyson chicken or H&R Block Express IRA class action settlements?

Jim Copland on Harry Reid and the trial bar. [NRO]

Jim Copland on the Ground Zero settlement, which may pay lawyers $200 million—but the judge plans fee scrutiny. [NY Post; NY Daily News]

Kevin LaCroix interviews the Circle of Greed authors. [D&O Diary]

Judgeships: Rhode Island lead paint trial lawyer in despite mediocre rating, but Sri Srinivasan out because of his clients—not Al Qaeda, but, heaven forfend, eeeevil corporations like Hertz.

There’s no evidence that workers on automotive brakes (which sometimes contain asbestos) get mesothelioma at a greater rate than the rest of the population, but auto companies still get sued over it. Ford fought one in Madison County, rather than settle, and won. [Madison County Record]

Overview of defensive medicine at work. [AP]

Pantsless Rielle Hunter on John Edwards: “He’s very honest and truthful.” [GQ]

Tags: asbestos, Bill Lerach, class action settlements, defensive medicine, Ford Motor, Ground Zero dust lawsuits, Harry Reid, judicial nominations, Madison County, politics, Rhode Island, Rielle Hunter

Update: South Carolina $18M sudden acceleration verdict reversed

Ted Frank — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:17:39 +0000

And in timely news, a specious $18M sudden acceleration verdict (see our August 2006 coverage) was unanimously reversed by the South Carolina Supreme Court after they threw out junk-science testimony theorizing that electromagnetic interference with the cruise control caused the sudden acceleration. Passengers in the crash that wore their seatbelts were uninjured, but the unbelted driver was paralyzed. The plaintiff has the option of a new trial. (Sonya Watson v. Ford Motor Company, h/t L Nettles comment).

Tags: autos, Ford Explorer, Ford Motor, junk science, South Carolina, sudden acceleration

Thumb-in-the-eye II: Cal Supremes affirm Buell-Wilson

Ted Frank — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:57:53 +0000

We’ve been following Buell-Wilson v. Ford for some time, including the U.S. Supreme Court remand. Curt Cutting’s blog has the latest in two April posts here and here. Cal Biz Lit also has good commentary.

Tags: autos, Buell-Wilson v. Ford, California, Ford Motor, punitive damages, San Diego

Another burden for legacy automakers

Walter Olson — Sun, 11 May 2008 10:38:23 +0000

State laws providing a kind of tenure protection for no-longer-needed car dealers are among the reasons it can be extremely expensive to close down a failing marque. General Motors, which closed Oldsmobile eight years ago, “spent more than five years battling dealer lawsuits” despite having set aside almost $1 billion to handle the transition, and Ford may face similar challenges if it tries to shutter its ailing Mercury line. (Martin Zimmerman, “Mercury may be coming to the end of the road”, Los Angeles Times, May 10). Earlier: Oct. 5, 2006. For more see this 2001 speech by FTC commissioner Thomas Leary, and this article by Missouri lawyer Gene Brockland on the federal Auto Dealers’ Day in Court Act, which is exceeded in stringency by some of its counterpart laws at the state level.

Tags: auto dealership protection laws, Ford Motor, General Motors

Jury not asked to blame driver, does so anyway

Walter Olson — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:59:23 +0000

“A Washington state woman who sued Ford Motor over her injuries in an SUV rollover accident isn’t exactly thrilled that a jury cleared the automaker — and awarded her $6 million in damages against her sister, who was the driver of the vehicle. … The federal jury in Spokane, Wash., found Marla Bear 100 percent at fault for losing control of the SUV, in which her younger sister was a passenger. According to trial testimony, the car swerved when she looked over her shoulder to see if Crystal had her seat belt attached.” Ford’s own attorney, whether for tactical reasons of sympathy or otherwise, had advised the jury against blaming the sister. (Matthew Heller, OnPoint News, Mar. 20) (via The Briefcase).

Tags: autos, Ford Motor, Washington state

March 21 roundup

Ted Frank — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:49:12 +0000

Updates galore:

Bogus Michael Boyle v. Ford verdict tossed by appellate court. [Law.com]
More on the Patent Troll Tracker lawsuit. [Law.com]
Federal district court rejects challenge to Michigan Proposition 2 ban on racial set-asides after far too much litigation over the voter initiative. [Open Market Blog]
Criminal charges reinstated against Empire State Building parachutist. [Turkewitz]
In the other Mississippi judicial bribery scandal (Oct. 12, Sep. 8, etc.), two judges report to federal prison. [Law.com/AP]
Hawaii tort reform bill dead after all. [Torts Prof]

Tags: Empire State Building, Ford Motor, Hawaii, Michigan, Mississippi, Patent Troll Tracker, roundups

Overlawyered » Ford Motor

November 21 roundup

Related posts

July 19 roundup

Related posts

Why U-Haul won’t rent trailers for Ford Explorers

Related posts

Update: Branham v. Ford

Related posts

March 16 roundup

Related posts

Update: South Carolina $18M sudden acceleration verdict reversed

Related posts

Thumb-in-the-eye II: Cal Supremes affirm Buell-Wilson

Related posts

Another burden for legacy automakers

Related posts

Jury not asked to blame driver, does so anyway

Related posts

March 21 roundup

Related posts