ugly rulling for Chrysler

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the largest award for single car accident was around $10 billions some years ago, the appeal court reduced it down to around $1 or 2 billions.

It is possible the appeal court may reduce it but also may increase it.
 
Last edited:
IDK what evidence of wrongdoing by Chrysler the plaintiff introduced, but it must have been compelling.
I have a better idea for dealing with corporate wrongdoing.
How about criminal prosecutions?
A large damage award only harms the equity holders.
Criminal charges place the blame and the penalty where they belong.
It's also possible that the current entity will skate on paying any of this award.
After all, the Jeep in question was made by what was legally a different corporate entity.
 
I remember when people were up and arms about when Ford v. Grimshaw and Ford was hit with $50 million in punitive about the Pinto.

If there was a problem, they deserve everything they get. And this is coming from Someone who likes Chrysler's tone these days.
 
The amount will most likely be reduced on appeal but not by much because it was a jury trial. The reduction will be driven by the need to show some results for the effort and will have nothing to do with the original arguments.

Chrysler's mistake was letting this go to trial. They're stuck if they want to continue to export their products to America.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
IDK what evidence of wrongdoing by Chrysler the plaintiff introduced, but it must have been compelling.
I have a better idea for dealing with corporate wrongdoing.
How about criminal prosecutions?
A large damage award only harms the equity holders.
Criminal charges place the blame and the penalty where they belong.
It's also possible that the current entity will skate on paying any of this award.
After all, the Jeep in question was made by what was legally a different corporate entity.


No way am I going to comment on this in any detail because of my down the road proximity of the incident and have heard first person accounts from some of the responders and witnesses over the years and this is an explosive touchy topic in this part of Ga. This part of the south takes horrific incidents like this very close and personal and people have very long memories.

If Chrysler takes this to the Appellate court in a different jurisdiction, don’t be surprised if the case is declared a mistrial and order a new trial in a different venue on the high end or a reduction in damages to a nominal amount at a minimum. If what is being said is even remotely true then this case has some potentially serious legal issues.

Think “My Cousin Vinny”- when one side is allowed to present what could be viewed as “speculation based on statistical data” based on a “what if” scenario as a scientific fact and deny the other side not only the opportunity to present data to the contrary but then prohibit them from doing the same in their defense- that will certainly sway a jury but it seldom affects a panel of judges.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
IDK what evidence of wrongdoing
A large damage award only harms the equity holders.


They are the "owners"
The equity holders (should) be the ones who set the CEO pay, say who (the ceo) should be running the company and how it is run.
All that seems to be taken away from us, and we only have us to blame.
These guys when they fail and get fired walk with 100 to 300 million.
 
Last edited:
While staying in a hotel the other day, the hotel had readers Digest for bedtime. Readers Digest had a post-mortem story about the spilled coffee verdict. Worth read read. I think she was awarded 72 million, came home with about $650K. She did deserve some of that money, but never got the headline verdict.
 
What I read was that Chrysler stared putting trailer hitches on new models and offering owners discounts to have installed. This was found in some documentation that hitch could help to reduce occurance. But they never notified people directly, because of liability I suppose. And I'm not bashing if had funds I'd probably buy a new 200.
 
A big judgement only penalizes the shareholders.
It doesn't penalize those who made the decisions that resulted in this young boy being burned to death.
The engineers didn't make those decisions, nor did the accountants or the factory managers.
Senior management made these decisions and they should be in the dock on criminal charges.
You want to curtail corporate wrongdoing?
Put a few of those who made the calls that resulted in this wrongdoing in state prison for a few years.
That's the only way I know to deter this type of crime.
Yes, this was a crime.
Allowing management to simply spend the shareholders' money to settle cases of wrongdoing will not bring any change.
Putting a few senior managers in prison would bring a change in practice and attitudes.
It's about time we required senior corporate management to have some skin in the game beyond having to deploy their golden parachutes.
 
Almost every automobile carries fuel aboard that when its container is breached creates a fire hazard.
Manufacturers simply pass tort settlements along to the rest of us; they're merely another cost of doing business.

No liability for deadwood former federal Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and ex-NHTSA Administrator David Strickland
and their ilk for having not mandated any redesign, of course.

R.I.P. Remi.
 
Originally Posted By: splinter
Almost every automobile carries fuel aboard that when its container is breached creates a fire hazard.
Manufacturers simply pass tort settlements along to the rest of us; they're merely another cost of doing business.

No liability for deadwood former federal Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and ex-NHTSA Administrator David Strickland
and their ilk for having not mandated any redesign, of course.

R.I.P. Remi.

Fuel tank should be on front of the rear cross member, so that it has some protection in rear end collision.

Fuel tank in this Jeep is just behind the rear bumper with no crumb zone. More than few people died when rear ended and fuel tank explored.

It is clearly design flaw and Chrysler knew it from beginning but they decided to go with it to save money, now they pay dearly for that decision.
 
Originally Posted By: SLATRON
What I read was that Chrysler stared putting trailer hitches on new models and offering owners discounts to have installed. This was found in some documentation that hitch could help to reduce occurance. But they never notified people directly, because of liability I suppose. And I'm not bashing if had funds I'd probably buy a new 200.


The one that had the accident and won the suit was not a model/year involved in the recall. Neither is mine. I also heard that they were putting skid plates on rather than the trailer hitch. But I also heard trailer hitch mentioned. Chrysler tried to get out of this whole recall and should have done it a lot sooner.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
A big judgement only penalizes the shareholders.
It doesn't penalize those who made the decisions that resulted in this young boy being burned to death.
The engineers didn't make those decisions, nor did the accountants or the factory managers.
Senior management made these decisions and they should be in the dock on criminal charges.
You want to curtail corporate wrongdoing?
Put a few of those who made the calls that resulted in this wrongdoing in state prison for a few years.
That's the only way I know to deter this type of crime.
Yes, this was a crime.
Allowing management to simply spend the shareholders' money to settle cases of wrongdoing will not bring any change.
Putting a few senior managers in prison would bring a change in practice and attitudes.
It's about time we required senior corporate management to have some skin in the game beyond having to deploy their golden parachutes.


Partner, I agree with everything you say and no I don’t “curtail corporate wrongdoing”- actually as one who provides expert testimony I am one of the ones who hold them accountable.

I deliberately limit myself in commenting on this specific case because of what I personally know from direct observation of the vehicle and scene and accounts from first hand people as well as hearing the “blow by blow” of the trial in the community as well out of respect for the families involved and the judicial process.

This has been a horrific and painful incident in the community next to me and it has touched hundreds of people to this day. No amount of time or lipstick is going to change that.

This particular accident is in no way “criminal” by any stretch of legal application to the parties or vehicle OEM’s. I have heard all the “details” from first hand people who were actually there. I went as far as to go look at the scene and saw the hulk just to satisfy my own mind before it was destroyed.

I’m going to close my participation in this thread out of respect to the parties involved but I want to say this before I do.

I’m all for accountability and have fought for it but that sword cuts both ways. Make sure you have all the facts before you pull yours out of the scabbard. This one specific incident may not fit the “mold”.

I’ll see you on other threads- out.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
A big judgement only penalizes the shareholders.
It doesn't penalize those who made the decisions that resulted in this young boy being burned to death.
The engineers didn't make those decisions, nor did the accountants or the factory managers.
Senior management made these decisions and they should be in the dock on criminal charges.
You want to curtail corporate wrongdoing?
Put a few of those who made the calls that resulted in this wrongdoing in state prison for a few years.
That's the only way I know to deter this type of crime.
Yes, this was a crime.
Allowing management to simply spend the shareholders' money to settle cases of wrongdoing will not bring any change.
Putting a few senior managers in prison would bring a change in practice and attitudes.
It's about time we required senior corporate management to have some skin in the game beyond having to deploy their golden parachutes.


The shareholders need to get together and oust somebody.
If they don't...they get what they get.

>It's about time we required senior corporate management to have some skin in the game beyond having to deploy their golden parachutes

Exactly!!!
 
Last edited:
Design met all federal safety stds for the gas tanks and bumper design in 1999

Statics indicate the design had lower incidence of fire and fatalities than cars,suvs and whatnot from that time period.

Bumper design met the 10 mph rating, and that truck hit the Jeep doing over 50 mph.

All the other fire related crashes showed similar circumstances, car going far in excess of 10 mph impacting the back of the Jeep.


Bottom line if I am on that jury, the guilty party is the person receklessly plowing into the back of the Jeep.

Now if Jeep didn't meet the Federal design stds for the rear bumper, then by all means sue Chrysler, but that isn't the case

Could someone today driving a antique Model T, get into an accident and then sue Ford because the Model T doesn't have 20 mph bumpers, no seat belts, no safety glass, no air bags, no ABS, no stability control?

Of course not, it met whatever standards there were at the time, just like the Jeep.

World needs to string up some of these money grubbing lawyers, the driver that hit the Jeep and their insurance needs to pay up and the driver go to jail for manslaughter!
 
"ugly ruling for Chrysler" ... Better call Saul.
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Al
Commplletely agree VNTS


As much as I hate Chrysler, I agree with both of the posts. If you meet the safety standards at the time of manufacture, you should have 0 liability for some idiot exceeding those design parameters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top