CNN targets Firestone prominently in this report. The point is that I predict a lawsuit will be filed regarding this unfortunate incident within a week or two, enough time for the VERY negligent father to recover from his (grief!). I surmise from the circumstances that the child that died was ejected from the vehicle, and probably was not wearing a seat belt. It appears that the Ford Explorer was overloaded as well.
The most amazing aspect of all this is that the local Webb County Sheriff’s Department spokesman, in an amazing impersonation of a National Transportation Safety Board investigator, has already proclaimed Firestone Tire tread seperation as the cause of the accident. This is less than one day after the tragedy.
Mark my words, this tort action will be filed, which Firestone will probably settle, but who has more fault? More importantly, who will gain?
I pray for tort reform in Texas, and hope that eventually the many abuses are thoroughly punished. GO GWB!!!
As long as there are lawyers, we will have ‘jackpot justice.’ I’m resigned to the fact that nothing is going to change. When a jury can hold GM liable for 4 billion dollars because the suing couple got hit by a drunk driver; or when a jury can award a fella 4 million because the BMW dealership touched up a paint scratch on a car before selling it…
Anyway, what’s the use? I apologize for my cynical demeanor on this. I read the paper every day, and stuff like this is a weekly occurrence. Much of it is based on junk science (e.g., silicone implant lawsuits), or on the perception that a corporation must pay because, well, they must be evil because they have so much money.
They are paying heavily because the corporations developed the bottom-line notion that if the potential costs of lawsuits pertaining to a defect cost less than fixing the defect, then fixing the defect will not be done. Juries rightly do not tolerate that kind of thinking. So they make sure the corporations will pay much more heavily in the lawsuits, in order to send the message: fixing potentially deadly and known defects in products will be much more cost-effective in the long run, to a company’s reputaion and to its financial bottom-line, than leaving those defects alone.
This version is even more emphatic, “TEXAS POLICE SAY BLOWOUT CAUSED FATAL CRASH” or words to that effect. How the hell do they know that, exactly? It seems to me there would have to be a lot of forensic evidence, analysis, and study before one could make that kind of definitive statement. I am not saying that the management types at Firestone are any band of angels, but nevertheless they are easy targets for lawsuits at this point in time, are they not?
Um, in the BMW case, the dealership had concealed the fact that the car had been dropped in being unloaded from the ship and sustained severe frame damage that had been repaired, if memory serves. This would have been a serious safety issue. But still, four million is a bit much. I think replacing the car would have been sufficient.
If the child was not buckled in, the family shouldn’t have a case. If the family knew the tires had been recalled, and were still driving on them, they shouldn’t have a case. But some lawyer probably will take it, and make a case out of it.
BTW, this thread will probably attract some posts about the McDonald’s coffe lawsuit. I still maintain that this was not a frivolous suit. The restaraunt in question had the heater set at least ten degrees higher than Mc.D’s corporate standards (which I think is still too high).
McD’s had knowingly served, as a bevarage, a liquid that was hot enough to cause second and third degree burns. They then refused to pay the woman’s medical expenses after she had been injured.
People spill coffee on themselves. It’s a given. That coffee should not be so hot that when it is spilled, someone needs skin grafts.
Maybe they saw that the tread had come off the new tires and it reminded them of the Firestone recall and all those other crashes, here and abroad, that were attributed to those tires?
Obi, Texans are many things, but at least some of them, including that Sheriff’s Department, can put two and two together. Even in the worst of accidents tire treads don’t break apart like these did, unless something happened directly to the tire that caused the accident (will some experts here testify to that?). If it is ruled that the defective tire is partly responsible for the child’s death, then Firestone could be partly liable. They’ll then have to pay for part of what they are sued for, based on 10% liability to 50%.
Well folks, you could live in good old Washington state. The law here requires people to wear seatbelts. But, when someone is in an accident and is hurt or killed because their not wearing a seatbelt, is it their fault? No. In Washington, a jury ** cannot be told ** that the idiot plaintiff was not weaing the seatbelt. They can’t be blamed for it. Yes, we reward people for idiocy here in Washington.
Our new state motto: Dumb? Come live here. We’re reversing the laws of natural selection for your convenience.
agisofia, I don’t think the car had any frame damage at all; however, I won’t be able to say until I check the information I have at home. I’ll post again with the straight dope later (even if I’m wrong :)).
The article presents quite a few cases in the Alabama court system that seem to be good evidence of jackpot justice. It is a very interesting article. It appeared in The American Spectator, which is conservative. The article uses factual evidence to support a political point. Therefore, there is the possibility of bias. If someone has evidence to counter the facts in the Gore case as quoted above, please post it for my edification.