ARTICLE ID 182246
$________ - PRODUCT LIABILITY - NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE - WRONGFUL DEATH - NEGLIGENT REPAIR OF TIRE BY FORD DEALERSHIP ALLEGEDLY CAUSES ROLLOVER COLLISION OF FORD VAN - FATAL INJURIES - SURVIVING CHILDREN FILE SUIT.
San Diego
In this wrongful death case, the decedents suffered
fatal injuries after the right rear tire of their Ford van
incurred a catastrophic tread separation which caused the vehicle
to roll over. The three surviving minor children filed suit
against the defendant Ford dealership that attempted to repair
the tire approximately 11 months prior to the subject rollover.
The plaintiff claimed the defendant was negligent in failing to
replace the damaged tire and in utilizing a patch-only technique
that did not effectively repair the tire. The defendant contested
both negligence and causation. The defendant claimed the patch
adequately remedied the puncture in the tire and that the tread
detachment which caused the rollover was not due to its
negligence, but rather to a prior impact the tire had with an
unknown object.
The deceased married couple, both 40 years old at the time, were
traveling on the highway in their Ford E350 Sportsmobile van when
the tread separated on their right rear tire, causing the van to
leave the roadway and roll over. Evidence revealed that
approximately 11 months earlier the plaintiffs had taken the van
to the defendant dealership to repair a tire puncture.
The plaintiffs alleged the puncture to the tire was located in
the shoulder area of the tire, outside of the proper repairable
area. They claimed that the defendant dealership should have
replaced the damaged tire, but instead utilized a patch-only
repair. Moreover, the plaintiffs claimed that even had a patch
been sufficient to repair the tire, the defendant performed the
repair improperly, without a plug and without properly preparing
the surface. The plaintiffs contended the defendant employed
inadequate tire repair practices and employee training.
The defendant took the position that like all employees, the
technician was extensively trained and highly qualified; thus,
the technician who performed the tire repair was called to
testify at trial. While questioning the witness, the plaintiffs
drilled a hole in a tire in the same position as the puncture on
the failed tire and inquired as to whether or not the witness
believed that the tire should be repaired or discarded given the
puncture. The technician first opined the tire was repairable,
but then claimed it couldnt be repaired, and finally stated he
was confused and could not decipher as to whether or not it was
repairable.
The defendant alleged the puncture to the tire on the plaintiffs
van was small and that the patch was all that was required to
repair the tire. The defendant additionally claimed its work on
the Ford van had no causal relationship to the tire failure. The
defendant introduced a theory to the jury that at some unknown
time, the tire had a prior impact with an object such as a rock,
a pothole, a curb or debris which damaged the internal components
of the tire. It was the defendants claim that this impact
occurred on the tire where the steel belt was severely disrupted,
causing the frayed and broken internal wires.
The plaintiffs accident reconstruction expert presented evidence
to the jury that in the particular area of the tire at issue in
this case, the shoulder lugs had not detached around most of the
tire and that the most outer edge of the tread piece was intact
except where the tire spun counterclockwise across the roadway.
He opined that it was the friction and roadway contact that
caused these wires to fray where they were not protected, not a
prior phantom impact.
The plaintiff additionally took the position that even assuming
the possibility of a phantom impact to the tire, which was
manufactured in ________, had a new tire been placed on the vehicle
at the time of the August ________ repair, this new tire would have
been considerably less likely to fail. The plaintiff introduced
into evidence a ________ Michelin tire that was equipped with a nylon
overlay. The plaintiff stated that in ________, Michelin began
manufacturing all its tires with this overlay, recognizing it
decreases tread belt separations. Thus, the plaintiff claimed
that had the tire been replaced in August ________, it would have
been replaced with one less likely to fail upon impact due to the
nylon overlay.
The plaintiffs suit also named several other parties, including
those who performed modifications to the Ford van, allegedly
making it more susceptible to handling problems. These defendants
settled before trial for $8.3 million. Prior to trial, the
defendant dealership offered $________ to settle the claim,
which increased to $________ just prior to trial. The plaintiffs
alleged past and future lost wages from the deceased males
carpentry work ranging from $________ to $________ and claimed
past and future loss of home services totaling $________.
After a seven week trial and three days of deliberation, the jury
awarded $________ million to the plaintiffs. After
apportionment of fault to others and set-off for the prior
settlements, the parties reached a settlement following the
verdict which included payment of the defendants $________
policy limits. The minor plaintiffs recovery therefore totaled
$________. As a condition of the settlement, the defendant
agreed to immediately begin following industry guidelines
regarding repair practices and to institute a program to better
train its technicians on safe tire repair practices.
5 ways to win with JVRA
JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:
- Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
- Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
- Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
- Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
- Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.
Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.