Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Law Suits

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Law Suits

    McALLEN, Texas (AP) - The first trial to come out of the Firestone tire debacle ended abruptly in a settlement Friday, with Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. agreeing to pay a reported $7.5 million to the family of a woman paralyzed in the rollover crash of a Ford Explorer.

    The settlement was announced shortly after the jury began a fourth day of deliberations in the closely watched $1 billion federal lawsuit.

    The amount was not disclosed, but two sources familiar with the settlement told The Associated Press that it was worth $7.5 million.

    "Our mission here, for our family, was to make sure no other person suffered like our family did," said Dr. Joel Rodriguez, whose 39-year-old wife, Marisa, was paralyzed and brain-damaged when the Explorer crashed on a Mexican road last year. "We feel that our objective has been met."

    Bridgestone/Firestone had blamed the accident on the Explorer, saying design flaws made it prone to rolling over.

    In settling the case, it admitted no liability.

    It was not known which way the jurors were leaning before deliberations were cut short. They were escorted out of the courtroom and their names were sealed by U.S. District Judge Filemon Vela, who recommended they not talk about the case because it could affect other lawsuits.

    The case was the first Firestone lawsuit to go to trial since the recall last summer of 6.5 million of the tires. Federal officials have linked more than 200 deaths to accidents involving Firestones on Explorers.

    Bridgestone/Firestone has settled about 200 cases and has some 300 still pending. Ford settled with the Rodriguezes for $6 million before trial.

    With more cases pending, the Texas trial had drawn intense scrutiny as the industry and personal-injury lawyers watched to see whether Bridgestone/Firestone could persuade a jury to assign at least some of the blame for the accident to Ford.

    Rodriguez's brother, Jorge Rodriguez, was driving the Explorer on a family trip in March 2000 when the steel belt and tread on the right rear tire tore apart. The vehicle overturned three times, crushing the roof.

    Rodriguez testified that his once-vibrant wife now spends her days sitting at a table or watching television, a frightening sight to her three children, including 4-year-old Joel Jr.

    "He wouldn't even climb up to the bed or be near her because he was scared. He would tell me that `My mama is dead,"' Rodriguez said.

    Firestone attorney Knox Nunnally said he believes the company illustrated that Ford was to blame. "The message anyone I believe would get out of this trial if they sat through all of the evidence is that (the Rodriguezes') Firestone tire was not the problem," he said.

    A Ford spokeswoman declined comment, but analysts didn't completely agree with Nunnally's assessment.

    "This could be read by consumers that Bridgestone/Firestone had the chance to prove it wasn't all their fault, and they blinked," said Michael Flynn, director of the Office for the Study of Automotive Transportation at the University of Michigan.

    Rodriguez's lawyers argued that Firestone officials knew the tread on the Wilderness AT tire was more likely to separate but rejected inexpensive changes to fix the problem, including 90-cent nylon strips.

    "This tire has killed more people than Timothy McVeigh. That is the awesome nature of the tragedy," said Mikal Watts, a lawyer for the family.

    Bridgestone/Firestone said the tire was fine when it left the factory but began to tear apart after the Explorer ran over a baseball-size object. Chief executive John Lampe testified that tread separation is not uncommon and that other vehicles could have pulled over safely after a tire failure.

    "We are glad we were able to reach a resolution with the Rodriguez family," the tire company said in a statement. "Since the outset, when we provided financial assistance to help with the family's medical bills, we have been hopeful that we could reach a fair settlement that would also bring closure to them following this accident."

    In addition to the $7.5 million agreed upon Friday, Bridgestone/Firestone gave the family $350,000 upfront to help pay medical expenses.

    Tab Turner, one of Rodriguez's lawyers, predicted more contentious litigation. Two suits that challenge Ford and Firestone are already scheduled for state court on Sept. 10 in Brownsville and Laredo.

    "These cases are not all identical," Turner said. "Some of these cases are more Ford cases than they are Firestone cases. There's going to be trials and there's going to be verdicts."
    You know I feel for this lady and her family but you know who will ultimately pay for this settlement, you and I the average consumer. Bridgestone/Firestone and Ford will both revamp their money just by raising the cost of the products that their companies have interest in and that is not just tires and cars.

    Joel
    Libertarian is still the way to go if we truly want a real change.

    www.lp.org

    ******************************

    System Specs: AMD XP2000+ @1.68GHz(12.5x133), ASUS A7V133-C, 512MB PC133, Matrox Parhelia 128MB, SB Live! 5.1.
    OS: Windows XP Pro.
    Monitor: Cornerstone c1025 @ 1280x960 @85Hz.

  • #2
    Joel,

    I agree with what your saying about Ford and Firestone recooping their losses in raising prices, but this whole thing is shame becasue I believe for the most part that it was driver error that caused these flipovers. I guess we can't ligate agaist stupididy of drivers.

    Scott
    Why is it called tourist season, if we can't shoot at them?

    Comment


    • #3
      Joel,
      What do you propose as a solution?
      Any monetary penalty to a corporation could be thought of the same way.
      Why should not all regulation & liability be ended in that case?

      Scott,
      Obviously, Firestone settled to avoid adjudicated liability.
      In other words they thought that the jury that actualy heard the evidence would dissagree with you.
      And you can litigate against a stupid driver if they injure you.
      It happens every day.
      chuck
      Chuck
      秋音的爸爸

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by cjolley
        Scott,
        Obviously, Firestone settled to avoid adjudicated liability.
        In other words they thought that the jury that actualy heard the evidence would dissagree with you.
        [/B]
        I guess I should have stated this a little more clearly. I feel that between the Explorer and the Firestone Tires, the Tires are the more evil of the two. Where my comment on stupid drivers is based off of is that Car And Driver Did testing on a used 94 Explorer with Firestone tires and deflated the driver's side rear tire(side that fails most likely) with in 7/10th of second at various speeds (maxing out at 70mph if I remember right), and had no problems what so ever controlling the vechicle. Many of these accidents happened when the vechicle was well over the National Speed limit of 65 mph. I guess it boils down to this...well because I was doing something stupid and you didnt tell me I was, I have the right to sue you.

        Its More or less along the lines of the infamous Hot Coffee warnings on coffee cups! If people used a little bit more common sense the world would be a much better place! I think the end game of this whole thing is that Firestone as a brand will go bye bye or out of business.

        Scott

        PS I think the reason they also settled was that if it did goto trial the judge would have to made a choice on who was more at fault here, and I guess firestone said well I guess that would be us and settled.
        Last edited by GT98; 27 August 2001, 11:38.
        Why is it called tourist season, if we can't shoot at them?

        Comment


        • #5
          cjolley,

          I don't know what the ultimate answer should be. I mainly brought this up to get people thinking as to who ultimately pays when a corporation as big as Firestone and Ford are suited.

          But GT98 brings up a good point. Should someone who is breaking the law at the time they get hurt be allowed to suit for compensation? In other words if a burgular in your house slips on a roller skate and gets hurt should he be allowed to sue you for that injury? Don't think of this as being too far fetched because it has happened.

          Personally I feel that Ford is more at fault because the tires that Ford uses on the Explorer are also used on other SUVs but they have not had the problems that the Explorer has. The Ford Explorer has a higher center of gravity than other SUVs and Ford recommends a lower air pressure in the tires than is recommended by Firestone. Lower air pressure causes a tire to heat up more causing greater rate of wear and also making it more prone to failure.

          Joel
          Libertarian is still the way to go if we truly want a real change.

          www.lp.org

          ******************************

          System Specs: AMD XP2000+ @1.68GHz(12.5x133), ASUS A7V133-C, 512MB PC133, Matrox Parhelia 128MB, SB Live! 5.1.
          OS: Windows XP Pro.
          Monitor: Cornerstone c1025 @ 1280x960 @85Hz.

          Comment


          • #6
            A few things:
            What national speed limit? The limit is 75 from here to Denver. And what if an emergency (wife is in labor, Dad has a heart attack, you have to avoid an accident that's happening in front of you) puts you above the speed limit? And Montana, don't they have a funky set of speed limits?

            Also, if Ford was running the tires at lower than the recommended pressure, then it should relieve Firestone of most fault. If I sell you knives with the warning "Keep out of the reach of children", and you sell the knives to a 2nd grade class, am I responsible for the injuries?

            One fact that I find most interesting is that more than one of the brands that Ford has been using to replace the Firestones has also been exhibiting these blowouts.
            Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

            Comment


            • #7
              Also,
              I think the lowest speed rating on tires in the US is about "S". (112 MPH I think)
              And the US has a very distributed (?) liability setup.
              The jury does not have to decide who is most at fault and make a "winner take all" decision.
              I think the ultimate problem is a lack of skepticism on the part of the American people.
              When the company lawyer says "We didn't do anything wrong" the jury should go "hmmm...."
              And when the injured party says "My life is sh*t, and it's all their fault" the jury should go "hmmm...."
              Instead it seems like juries sometimes just go 100% with whoever they hear last.
              "A Nation of Sheep" indeed
              chuck
              Chuck
              秋音的爸爸

              Comment


              • #8
                If I sell you knives with the warning "Keep out of the reach of children", and you sell the knives to a 2nd grade class, am I responsible for the injuries?
                In our current 'pass the buck' society yes you are. Let me give you a couple of examples. A guy near here in Kentucky was shot and killed by a group of guys, who didn't like the fact that he had a Confederate flag in the rear window of his truck, and his wife filed a law suit againist Wal-Mart, who legally sold the ammo to one of the guys in the group. If you are broadsided by a drunk driver you can file suit againist the bartender who served him the drinks.

                One fact that I find most interesting is that more than one of the brands that Ford has been using to replace the Firestones has also been exhibiting these blowouts.
                Yeah I find that interesting too. But if you look real deep into this is has turned into a big family spat. Not only are they partners in business but they are also united through marriage.

                Joel
                Libertarian is still the way to go if we truly want a real change.

                www.lp.org

                ******************************

                System Specs: AMD XP2000+ @1.68GHz(12.5x133), ASUS A7V133-C, 512MB PC133, Matrox Parhelia 128MB, SB Live! 5.1.
                OS: Windows XP Pro.
                Monitor: Cornerstone c1025 @ 1280x960 @85Hz.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Instead it seems like juries sometimes just go 100% with whoever they hear last.
                  And usually it's the big guy who losses because the juries that are pick today are very swayed by the 'oh look at me, poor pityful me' lines. Just look at the court case of the life long smoker who sued the tobacco companies, and was awarded how many billions of dollars. He even admitted that he knew the dangers and had even quit serveral times to start back up. He was even told by his doctor, before he had cancer, that he needed to quit. I know, I know, but they say that tobacco is addicting. Well alcohol can be addicting. Caffeine is addicting. Some people are even addicted to sex. So if I were to fall out of bed while having sex and break my arm then I should sue the mattress company for making a mattress that could not stand up to my wild love making?

                  Just another one of those 'pass the buck' situations.

                  If we really want to hurt these companies for doing wrong then the American public will need to wake up and realize that the power we have is in our numbers. Think about it. If all Americans stoped buying Firestone or Ford products because of their wrong doings then that will hurt them more than any law suits. But unfortunately we live in a society where it's look out for number one and to hell with everyone else. Just look at our politicians they are only looking out for themselves and their future political careers.

                  Joel
                  Libertarian is still the way to go if we truly want a real change.

                  www.lp.org

                  ******************************

                  System Specs: AMD XP2000+ @1.68GHz(12.5x133), ASUS A7V133-C, 512MB PC133, Matrox Parhelia 128MB, SB Live! 5.1.
                  OS: Windows XP Pro.
                  Monitor: Cornerstone c1025 @ 1280x960 @85Hz.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Now don't get me wrong. If Firestone and/or Ford was negligent in this case then yes this woman should be taken care of. But the original suit was for 1 billion dollars. The family settled with the two for a conbined amount of 15 million and had already recieved over $350,000 for her medical expenses and care. I know you say that you can't put a price tag on something like this or someones life, but they obviously did, but there should be a limit. Because like I said before law suits like this don't hurt the companies at all because they will just pass the cost along to the consumer.

                    Joel
                    Libertarian is still the way to go if we truly want a real change.

                    www.lp.org

                    ******************************

                    System Specs: AMD XP2000+ @1.68GHz(12.5x133), ASUS A7V133-C, 512MB PC133, Matrox Parhelia 128MB, SB Live! 5.1.
                    OS: Windows XP Pro.
                    Monitor: Cornerstone c1025 @ 1280x960 @85Hz.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Cafeine is addictive? OMFG am I hosed.
                      chuck
                      Chuck
                      秋音的爸爸

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Damn cjolley...

                        I'm in trouble now.

                        I started drinking coffee so that I could stay up late without feeling tired. Now that I don't want to stay up late I can't stop drinking coffee and I can't sleep.

                        So therefore I am suing Columbia for Having Beans, Juan Valdez for Supplying a substance that should be banned and his donkey for being an accomplice and the main reason those beans get to market.

                        I am suing the following for

                        Columbia - 3 Million dollars
                        Juan Valdez - 6 Million dollars
                        Donkey - 9 Million dollars (Just because he's an @ss )
                        AMD Phenom 9650, 8GB, 4x1TB, 2x22 DVD-RW, 2x9600GT, 23.6' ASUS, Vista Ultimate
                        AMD X2 7750, 4GB, 1x1TB 2x500, 1x22 DVD-RW, 1x8500GT, 22" Acer, OS X 10.5.8
                        Acer 6930G, T6400, 4GB, 500GB, 16", Vista Premium
                        Lenovo Ideapad S10e, 2GB, 500GB, 10", OS X 10.5.8

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X