Filed under: SUVs, Safety, Ford
Ford rollover settlement under re-review
In 2002, Benetta Buell-Wilson was driving her 1997 Ford Explorer in Southern California when she swerved to avoid debris on the freeway. The high center of gravity of the SUV and the quick steering input caused the Explorer to roll four-and-a-half times, eventually coming to rest on its roof. The impact caused the roof to collapse, crushing Mrs. Buell-Wilson's neck and paralyzing her from the waist down. The subsequent lawsuit, claiming that Ford manufacturered a faulty roof, awarded her $369 million dollars, of which $246 million was classified as punitive damages. In the proceeding cases, that figure was cut down twice by a California state appeals court to $82.6 million.On Monday, the Supreme Court ordered the state appeals court to review the decision, using the court's decision to overturn $79.5 million in punitive damages awarded during the highly-publicized tobacco case that was heard earlier this year. The rational being that the jury can punish a defendant only for the harm done to the plaintiff and not to the other people affected.
Ford claims that the roof was designed to meet federal safety standards and that no wrongdoing had taken place. This is one of many cases that Ford has had to defend over the past several years.
[Source: Bloomberg]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Mike 11:38AM (5/15/2007)
he who has the deepest pockets...
Reply
John P. 11:42AM (5/15/2007)
The lawyers will end up with the deepest pockets in the end. It's a money grab, that's it.
Reply
roadside observer 11:51AM (5/15/2007)
"2. The lawyers will end up with the deepest pockets in the end. It's a money grab, that's it."
Exactly right.
Reply
Mike G 11:54AM (5/15/2007)
I agree, mostly for the lawyers. Yes the poor woman should get enough of a settlement to cover her medical care for life, but wouldn't that be closer to $5 million than $80 million? Oh erm excuse me I did forget about the Ferraris and club fees for the law firm's senior partners, now I get it...
Reply
Mike 11:54AM (5/15/2007)
google search for 'ford' and 'lawsuit' and you will see a string of '$10mil awarded in suit' '54 mil awarded in suit' '12 mil awarded in suit' 'class action suit' etc.
Ford could cut thousands upon thousands of dollars from the price of a new vehicle if idiots who don't know how to drive would stop suing for their own stupidity.
Reply
Cly 12:00PM (5/15/2007)
Mike, sometime it's not the driver. In the case of the Explorer, it takes two to tango. The Ford Explorer is a terrible car that shouldn't have been allowed on the road. The suspension is softer than your pillow.
Reply
Mike 12:03PM (5/15/2007)
google search for 'ford' and 'lawsuit' and you will see a string of '$10mil awarded in suit' '54 mil awarded in suit' '12 mil awarded in suit' 'class action suit' etc.
Ford could cut thousands upon thousands of dollars from the price of a new vehicle if idiots who don't know how to drive would stop suing for their own stupidity.
Reply
3cubedminus3squared 12:09PM (5/15/2007)
Yeah its such a terrible vehicle. Thats why it was the number one SUV for so long.
If you take time to learn the limitations to your vehicle, and perform regular maintennance then you really shouldn't be having things like this happen.
Reply
Mike 12:13PM (5/15/2007)
"In 2002, Benetta Buell-Wilson was driving her 1997 Ford Explorer in Southern California when she swerved to avoid debris on the freeway. The high center of gravity of the SUV and the quick steering input caused the Explorer to roll four-and-a-half times, eventually coming to rest on its roof"
She was in a five year old vehicle... I assume she had not purchased it that day. She made too abrupt of a manuever. The Explorer does not steer itself. Her inappropriate steering inputs are what caused the explorer to roll, the explorer did not choose to die on its own.
"The Ford Explorer is a terrible car that shouldn't have been allowed on the road."
Yet, there are still hundreds of thousands on the road that haven;t rolled over and died on their own, with thousands or hundreds of thousands of miles on them, AND they met every single federal standard (safety, emissions, and other regulations.)
Put your bias aside. You might not like the explorer, but it met all standards and the accident was caused by driver error.
Reply
rrr 12:23PM (5/15/2007)
Ohh i see Ford fan boys have no shame at all.
Why is this even an issue. Thi is by far not the first lawsuit that alleges that Explorer rolls over.
Look GM makes SUVs too, but you do not see lawsuits agains those SUVs, however you do see lawsuits agains EXPLORES and BROCOS......BOTH made by Ford.
As i said the key here is that this is NOT the first time Frd is being sued for this issue.
There are MIllions of Suvs out there, made by Toyota, Honda, GM, Benz, Chrysler, Huindai....and whoever else. And yet only Explorer and to a lesser extent Bronco are the ones who are being sued.
GET A CLUE.
Reply
paul34 12:27PM (5/15/2007)
In America, you don't have common sense or social progress, you have lawsuits! YAY GOD BLESS 'MERCA
Reply
Mike 12:33PM (5/15/2007)
Sounds like she was already paralyzed from the neck up.
Reply
geo.stewart 12:35PM (5/15/2007)
Gotta support ford:
Met federal safety requirements- so where is the negligence?
high center of gravity of an SUV- well duh!
She should have lost and been forced to pay all lawyer and legal fees, as well as compensation for employees taken away from reg work. That would cut down on frivolous lawsuits.
Reply
bmoredlj 12:36PM (5/15/2007)
Tens of thousands of people die in auto accidents a year in our country. I think its safe to say that driving is not that safe. Driving is taking a risk. Driving is sharing the road with vehicles that are extremely unsafe under certain conditions due to their high centers of gravity and poor driving dynamics. Driving is sharing the road with emotional people who want to be at the front of the line of cars and will weave in and out to get there. The result of this is tens and thousands of fatalities. And with all the human flaws that lead to these deaths, it seems like piling on for a company to build cars that have the potential to contribute further to the risks of driving. Automakers may be playing with fire by offering products that have such a slim margin of error for safe driving, but I have to agree with #9. Cars don't cause accidents. Bad drivers cause accidents. If there's debris on a highway, an attentive driver who is familiar with their car should (A) be able to see the debris before its right on top of them, and (B) be able to avoid it, using the safe maneuvering options the Explorer allows. If you push the limits of such vehicles, they will bite you in the ass. But it's not like the Explorer steered itself. Legally, Ford shouldn't have to pay one dime.
Reply
Mike 12:36PM (5/15/2007)
rrr: get a clue. Ford is consistently targeted because of several factors:
1) heightened public awareness after the ford-firestone fiasco.
2) PRECEDENT.
3) Burden of Proof. Due to the previous cases in which juries have awarded undue punative damages, there is a lot of data in the public record. Therefore, when someone WANTS to sue, there is far less digging to due since data is already in the public sphere. To do so with a sequoia or 4 runner would mean going through the process of discovery, which would be fought tooth and nail by the manufacturer adding massive time delays and massive amounts of lawyer fees/costs.
Reply
willem 12:39PM (5/15/2007)
Can anyone say "tort reform", boys and girls? Personal responsibility be damned and all hail the almighty trial lawyer!
Reply
anagogue 12:58PM (5/15/2007)
Another factor for the Explorer that I've never seen anyone point out is that it is (or was) a REAL SUV. It has a higher center of gravity and softer suspension because it is meant to be offroad capable. This is not a design flaw. It is a specific requirement of a certain type of vehicle. The problem comes when people buy these for a purpose other than that for which they are intended, and then drive them like they are on-road only vehicles.
Additionally, being REAL SUVs, intended to have REAL four wheel drive capability, Ford puts very quick and responsive power steering in (this covers the Broncos and F series trucks as well, for the same reason). Ever driven one in 4x4 over even moderate terrain? You will certainly appreciate the steering aspects. However, the downside is that even small steering inputs on-road, when not in four wheel drive, have much greater effect than many people are used to from other on-road vehicles. The combination of all this, yes, does make Explorers easier to roll on road. Oh darn.
Buy a damn vehicle for the purpose for which it's intended, or live with the design trade-offs. Sadly, now, the Explorer, like most other "SUVs" are made more and more car like to combat these types of lawsuits. People! If you want more hauling room, a higher seating position for road view, but no off road capability, buy a damn minivan! That's what they were invented for! Oh, I'm sorry. They're not as chic as an SUV? Then buy a fake SUV, or live with the consequences of a real one.
Reply
willem 1:04PM (5/15/2007)
This is just about as moronic as the dumb broad that sued for spilling a cup of coffee on her lap while straddling it at a McDonald's drive-through some years back. If you're sipping lukewarm coffee as a result of trial lawyers, consider this: coffee brews properly at around 200 degrees Fahrenheit and one has thicker skin on their lips and in their mouths than around their lap. Don't get me started on how John Edwards (D)himmicrat made his fortune...
Reply
j 1:27PM (5/15/2007)
I think Toyota's can roll over too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQRkviNDlwo
Reply
jordan 1:43PM (5/15/2007)
Re: willem
Read about the case before saying it's moronic. Also, you say 200 degrees is the temperature at which to brew coffee, and that's also not factual.
McDonald's, at the time, listed brew temperatures at 170-190 degrees farenheight, which is ~30-60 degrees MORE than you need (and what other restaurants use) to brew coffee. Why brew at a higher temperature? Simple, they can use less coffee grounds at a higher temperature and get the same flavor.
If you're still not convinced, do a Google search before posting slander like this.
Reply