Rollover victim wins $369M verdict

**dx8976** · June 4th, 2004 01:22 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/03/fo....ap/index.html

SAN DIEGO, California (AP) -- A jury has ordered Ford Motor Co. to pay nearly $369 million to a woman paralyzed in a rollover accident involving a Ford Explorer, the nation's best-selling sport utility vehicle.

The jury Thursday ordered the No. 2 automaker to pay $246 million in punitive damages. It awarded more than $122.6 million in compensatory damages Tuesday.

The award is one of the biggest ever against the automaker and marked the first loss after 11 victories in rollover lawsuits involving the Ford Explorer.

Ford, based in Dearborn, Michigan, has said it will appeal.

The trial involved a January 2002 accident east of San Diego. Driver Benetta Buell-Wilson swerved to avoid a metal object and lost control of her 1997 Explorer, which rolled 41/2 times.

During a news conference after the verdict, Buell-Wilson, a 49-year-old mother of two, offered to knock $100 million off the damage award if Ford would fix the design problems in the Explorer that left her permanently paralyzed from the waist down.

"I'm hoping they'll fix what's out there because I don't want what's happened to me to happen to anyone else," Buell-Wilson said Thursday.

In a statement, Ford insisted the Explorer was safe.

"Although the offer makes a great sound bite, it doesn't change the facts: The Explorer meets or exceeds all Federal safety standards. There is no defect with the Explorer," spokeswoman Kathleen Vokes said.

"The Explorer is an outstanding vehicle with a solid safety record and we will continue to aggressively defend our products."

Ford has sold more than 5 million Explorers since the vehicle was introduced in 1990, she said.

Dennis Schoville, Buell-Wilson's attorney, contended Ford had sacrificed passenger safety for profits. The lawsuit involved design issues found on all Explorers made through 2001, Schoville said.

Schoville said Ford declined to follow its engineers' suggestions to widen the Explorer's wheel track or to lower its center of gravity -- costly changes that would make the vehicle more stable. Concern about costs also kept Ford from sufficiently reinforcing the Explorer's roof to protect passengers in a vehicle "they know is going to roll over," he said.

"This is an important message because there are a lot of people out there that are driving these vehicles that don't have, like Mrs. Wilson, any clue of what could happen," Schoville said.

**racerx** · June 4th, 2004 01:51 PM

only in the land of litigation...
but everybody else follows their initiative hehe

**Walter** · June 5th, 2004 11:46 AM

You swerved most SUVs at high speed and they will roll over.

**dieselNUBI** · June 5th, 2004 12:24 PM

un nga ang delikado sa states eh. lahat sila high speeds, ndi pwede pa bagal bagal gaya dito sa atin. kaya nga madalas ang highway accidents nila eh.

**empy** · June 5th, 2004 02:30 PM

that cash award is ridiculous. most of the time, US judges knock down the punitive damages - some juries are just stupid.

**kyle618** · June 6th, 2004 12:01 AM

un nga ang delikado sa states eh. lahat sila high speeds, ndi pwede pa bagal bagal gaya dito sa atin. kaya nga madalas ang highway accidents nila eh.

haha dto pagnabangga... dent lng ksi turtle speeds tayo magdrive! hehe

**pajerokid** · June 9th, 2004 10:17 AM

If the verdict holds up, yari ang Ford!!!

Imagine, may precedent na....

**pissword** · June 9th, 2004 10:56 AM

haayy i dont think kasalanan ng explorer yan.. oo nga most SUV pag swerve at high speed sigurado turnturtle yan...

dito sa atin d na kelangan iswerve sa pangit ng daan tuturnturtle na deretcho ang SUV sa highspeed hehe

**the_wildthing** · June 9th, 2004 11:06 AM

There was this "other side" that I read somewhere about frivolous lawsuits. American culture has spawned the mentality of "lets sue the big bad companies" when sometimes if we just look at it, if they weren't stupid or if they followed certain instructions or even plain common sense, the accidents wouldn't have happened. It's like saying, "It's my mistake, but let's see if I can shift the blame to the manufacturer of this otherwise great product."

I'm not acquainted with the full facts of this case. I would imagine if she just swerved without hitting the brakes, it wouldn't have turned over. But I wouldn't really know and I'm not willing to try it.

Just my two cents...

**empy** · June 9th, 2004 11:44 AM

Originally posted by the_wildthing
There was this "other side" that I read somewhere about frivolous lawsuits. American culture has spawned the mentality of "lets sue the big bad companies" when sometimes if we just look at it, if they weren't stupid or if they followed certain instructions or even plain common sense, the accidents wouldn't have happened. It's like saying, "It's my mistake, but let's see if I can shift the blame to the manufacturer of this otherwise great product."

case in point:

lawsuit: woman sues McDonalds because she burned herself by spilling a cup of hot coffee in her lap while exiting a drive-thru

award: USD 1.2 million

reason: apparently McDonalds did not label their coffee cups with a warning that 'contents are hot'

WTF??! what coffee is NOT hot? btw, this happened in california also