Archived Verdicts & Decisions

CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE. CASE
RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE.

2005     2004     2003     2002     2001

NOVEMBER 2005

Jury returns a defense verdict in Honda ATV trial
After deliberating for less than two hours, the jury returned a special defense verdict finding no defect by a vote of 11 to 1 and no negligence by a unanimous vote. In the lawsuit, the plaintiff claimed the Honda ATV was unstable and caused the accident on June 15, 1996, which left John Ogozaly a quadriplegic. For more details, click here.

Jury delivers defense verdict in Christal v. Abdo.
After only an hour, the jury returned a defense verdict in the wrongful death case of Christal v. Abdo. Parents of David Austin Christal ("Austin") sued Joseph Abdo, M.D. for $4 million in the wrongful death of their son, who died two days after a tonsillectomy. For more details, click here.

JULY 2005

Lansing Jury says Ford Festiva safety belt not defective in Simmer v. Ford Motor Company
The eight-person jury found that the 1992 Ford Festiva’s passive safety belt was not defective nor was it responsible for the death of Antoinette Simmer. Her son, plaintiff Erik Simmer, claimed during the three-week trial, that the Festiva’s passive restraint system caused his mother’s fatal injuries, by compressing her chest and causing a ruptured aorta and a severe injury to her liver. For more details, click here.

Judge rules in Ecolab's favor
On July 5, 2005, Magistrate Alonzo P. Wilson of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana entered summary judgment in favor of Ecolab Inc. and dismissed the claims of two nurses who alleged that their exposure to fumes of an Ecolab institutional floor wax stripper containing glycol ethers caused their two babies to suffer from the fatal birth defect anencephaly. For more details, click here.

JUNE 2005

Federal judge awards General Motors summary judgment
After finding lack of causation between product defect and medical injury by the plaintiff, the Honorable Glen M. Williams adopted the Report-and-Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Pamela Meade Sargent granting Summary Judgment in GM’s favor on June 29, 2005. For more details, click here.

Minneapolis team receives unanimous verdict for Kia Motors Corporation
An eight-member jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Kia Motors Corporation on June 15, 2005. After only 90 minutes the jury found the Kia Sportage was not defective in design. Plaintiffs argued that Kia was fully liable for the driver’s catastrophic neck injury and asked for over $24 million in damages. For more details, click here.

Directed verdict for Ford in post crash fire case
Following a three-week jury trial in Danville, Virginia, on June 27, 2005, United States Federal District Judge Norman K. Moon entered a memorandum decision directing a verdict for Ford Motor Company in this automotive product liability action involving double above-knee amputations, debilitating upper body nerve damage and severe torso burns. Plaintiff’s originally settlement demand exceeded $100 million. For more details, click here.

Oklahoma jury says Ford not liable in F-350 rollover
After two hours of deliberations, an Oklahoma City jury said Ford Motor Company was not responsible for injuries related to a 2003 rollover crash. Alfred Doolin, a retired telephone company worker, claimed the roof on Ford's 1999 F-350 Supercab truck has inadequate roof strength, collapses during rollovers and did not meet federal safety standards for strength. At trial, Ford defense attorneys proved that even if Ford made a stronger roof, it still would not have prevented Doolin’s injuries in this crash. For more details, click here.

MARCH 2005

Michigan Judge agrees to quash plaintiff's request for Volvo documents in Indiana Kia case
On March 29, 2005, the Honorable Judge Donald Scheer of U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan agreed to quash Plaintiff’s request for confidential and proprietary Ford documents (actually produced by Ford's subsidiary, Volvo) for a Kia case currently pending in Indiana. Ford is not a party in the underlying action, and no Ford or Volvo vehicle is involved in the Flis claim. For more details, click here.

Minneapolis team receives defense verdict in Toyota trial
A Suffolk County jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant Toyota Motor Corporation following a 23-day trial. In her lawsuit, the plaintiff alleged that the driver’s air bag was overly aggressive in the 1996 Toyota Corolla sedan she was driving at the time of her accident. The defense team, led by David Graves, was able to prove that the Corolla’s driver air bag’s "aggressivity" was no different than that of many other vehicles. With expert-witnesses and cross examinations, Graves was able to prove that the Corolla was properly tested, and it met all safety standards in effect at that time.

FEBRUARY 2005

Honda awarded nearly half million in fees by Las Vegas judge in airbag case
February 9, 2005, a judge ruled that plaintiffs were “grossly unreasonable” in rejecting Honda’s prior offer. Because of plaintiffs’ “unreasonable” rejection of Honda’s offer, Judge Glass awarded $347,793.50 in attorney’s fees pursuant to Nevada's offer of judgment statute. The court also granted $172,360.19 for costs, bringing the total award against plaintiffs to $520,153.69. Click here for more information.

Unanimous Jury Says Ford and TRW not responsible in South Carolina rollover
On February 3, a unanimous South Carolina jury ruled in favor of Ford Motor Company and TRW, VSSI, finding a 2000 Lincoln Navigator was not defective nor responsible for the death of Barbara Viggiano. Her husband, plaintiff Gary Viggiano, claimed during the two-week trial, the Navigator’s seat belt failed due to retractor “spool out”, resulting in her ejection through the driver’s door glass opening. Click here for more information.

DECEMBER 2004

Tom Klein and Fred Fresard claim jury defense verdict in Texas in Kohutek v. GM!
On December 7, a Texas jury agreed that the roof of General Motors’s 2003 Tahoe was not defective and was not the cause of Plaintiff Alan Kohutek’s injuries. At trial, Kohutek argued the Tahoe’s roof and seat belts don't protect occupants during a rollover. Click here for more information.

JULY 2004

Minneapolis team receives defense verdict in Hyundai trial
On July 21, 2004, an Eau Claire County jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant Hyundai Motor Company following the three day trial. In her lawsuit, plaintiff alleged the Hyundai Accent was defective because the airbags deployed in the collision. She also alleged Hyundai’s warnings relating to the airbags were inadequate. She alleged her leg was broken by the force of the airbag deployment. Click here to learn more...

Toyota cleared in road rage crash -- Judge enters final order in 4Runner rollover trial
On July 9, Judge K. Peter Sears of San Joaquin County Superior Court entered final judgment in favor of Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., ending a four-year legal battle challenging the handling, stability, and roof strength of the 1995 4Runner SUV. This follows a May 21 unanimous defense verdict after a 3 ½ month trial in Lily Kephart, et al. v. Toyota Motor Corporation, et al. -- the first such defense verdict in six years for the popular SUV line. Click here to learn more...

JUNE 2004

Lemon Law Plaintiff to Pay Subaru $75K in WRX Warranty Dispute
On June 14, 2004 a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge awarded $75,000 in attorney's fees to Subaru of America, Inc. under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act. In awarding the attorney's fees the court found the evidence was overwhelming the plaintiff had attempted to defraud Subaru in bringing the action, and plaintiff's attorneys had an obligation to and should have determined that either when they filed the suit or during investigation and discovery. Click here to learn more...

MAY 2004

Founding Partner David Kelly defends Mitsubishi in first Montero rollover trial
On May 18, 2004, after a trial lasting just over two weeks, a Milwaukee, Wisconsin jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Mitsubishi in the first products liability "rollover" case to be tried involving Mitsubishi's popular "Montero" SUV. Click here to learn more...

NOVEMBER 2003

Ford cleared in Waco, TX lawsuit -- Jury finds driver responsible for crash and awards $4 million to plaintiff
On November 20, 2003 a Waco, Texas jury found in favor of Ford Motor Company after eight days of trial and two hours of deliberations. The unanimous jury found no defect in the stability or side glass of a 1991 Ford Ranger, as Plaintiff Shannon Cain had claimed. The jury assessed full responsibility to the driver, awarding Cain $4 million in damages. Click here to learn more...

SEPTEMBER 2003

Straight from the courtroom steps! 12-0 defense verdict in Beck Ruiz v. Kia trial
Following a seven-week trial and four hours of deliberations, a Santa Rosa, CA jury found no defect in the seat back or stability of a 1997 Kia Sportage. Attorneys for the defense were Paul Cereghini and Mark Berry  from our Phoenix and Los Angeles offices. Click here for more information.

Case Dismissed in Virginia - Adams v. American Suzuki Motor Corporation
This month, Richmond attorney Rob Wise successfully defended American Suzuki Motor Corporation and a local dealership in a products liability case in which the plaintiff alleged personal injuries from a crash due to an allegedly defective rear axle in her 1995 Suzuki Sidekick. Plaintiff claimed the rear axle broke, causing the right rear wheel to come off and plaintiff to crash. Plaintiff was ejected during the crash and sued ASMC and the other defendants for $300,000. After plaintiff twice filed suit but failed to disclose an expert to support her defect claims, Rob convinced the court to dismiss plaintiff's claims against ASMC and the dealership with prejudice and to award ASMC its attorney's fees. (Circuit Court of Campbell County, Virginia).

JULY 2003

Unanimous CA jury says Polaris ATV brakes have no defect --
Four-week trial ends after 10 minutes of deliberation
On July 10, a central California jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in favor of Polaris Industries, after deliberating 10 minutes following a four-week trial. The 12-person jury found no design defect in the rear brake system of the 1993 Polaris Trail Boss 250 ATV, as plaintiff Dennis Theriot claimed. The lawsuit stemmed from a June 25, 2000 accident near Pismo Beach, when Theriot lost control of his ATV and skidded off the road. Theriot claimed the rear brakes in his 1993 Polaris Trail Boss 250 ATV did not operate in neutral, resulting in an inability to stop the vehicle when it suddenly popped out of gear and forcing him and his wife to jump from the ATV, leaving his left hand severely broken. Click here for more information.

JUNE 2003

Development permit withdrawn in Chesapeake wetlands --
State Water Control Board moves to protect 145 acres of valuable wetlands
After mounting pressure by the Virginia office of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Tri-City Properties, L.L.C. withdrew consideration of its application to the State Water Control Board for development of a 428-acre multi-use community in Chesapeake, VA. Had the permit been approved, the development would have destroyed 145 acres of protected non-tidal wetlands –in direct and blatant violation of a 2000 Virginia law. Click here to learn more about how Robert Wise of our Richmond office handled this case.

NY Jury says Vermeer stump cutter not defective
A Westchester County, New York jury returned a defense verdict on Friday, June 6 finding that an SC 252 stump cutter, manufactured by Vermeer Manufacturing Company in 1996, was not defective. Plaintiff Pasqualino Guzzo-Crocamo claimed that the guard over the cutter wheel of the stump cutter was inadequate. Click here for more information.

MAY 2003

Nissan wins SUV rollover lawsuit -- Plaintiffs abandon case on eve of trial
On Tuesday, May 27, plaintiffs Robert and Rachelle Loncarevic voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit against Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. and Nissan North America, Inc., based on the Loncarevics’ claim their 1997 Nissan Pathfinder was unreasonably dangerous and defective due to a high center of gravity and propensity to rollover. Plaintiffs abandoned these claims against Nissan on the eve of trial in the face of several motions Nissan’s attorneys filed challenging the opinions of plaintiffs’ primary expert witness, William Medcalf. Click here for more information.

Jury Finds for Mazda in Warranty Claim
On May 12, after six days of trial, and 1¾ hours of deliberations, an Orange County jury returned a 10-2 verdict in favor of Mazda Motor of America, Inc. on plaintiff Monica Huchro’s Song-Beverly cause of action. The jury later explained their findings that usage was not substantially impaired because plaintiff drove her vehicle over 40,000 miles, that safety was not substantially impaired because plaintiff could pick safe gas stations to fuel up, and that value was not substantially impaired to an average person. Click here for more information.

Arkansas Federal Court Jury Exonerates Mercury Cougar
After six and one-half hours of deliberation, although Plaintiffs' attorneys had suggested an award of $5 -6 million in compensatory damages and unspecified punitive damages, a federal court jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in favor of Ford Motor Company on April 23, 2003. The jury found that Ford's 1999 Mercury Cougar was not negligently designed and was not unreasonably dangerous, and the vehicle was not the cause of the crash which led to the death of the Cougar's driver. Click here for more information.

MARCH 2003

Greenwood v. Honda -- unanimous defense verdict in Phoenix
On March 6, 2003, after two hours of deliberation, a nine-person Phoenix jury in this four-week automobile crashworthiness product liability trial returned a unanimous defense verdict. Click here for more details.

New trial motion for Ricci v. Volvo denied --
Rare Volvo Crash trial results in earlier unanimous defense verdict;
Known for safety, plaintiff claimed an unsafe roof and misleading ads
After a six-week trial and five hours of deliberation, a Reno, NV federal court jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in favor of Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. on January 24, 2003. Under current Nevada law, all strict liability cases must be unanimous decisions. Plaintiff Patrick Ricci and his wife Patricia claimed their 1986 Volvo 740 GLE sedan had a weak and unsafe roof. On March 17, 2003 the trial court denied plaintiff's motion for a new trial and upheld the jury verdict. Click here for more details.

FEBRUARY 2003

Northern California jury finds for Ford in sudden acceleration suit
On Friday, February 28, a Sacramento County jury returned a verdict in favor of Ford Motor Company, finding that a1989 Ford Taurus had no defect in the design of its cruise control system, door latch and seat belt, as claimed by Carolyn Watts. The jury returned its verdict in less than two hours after an eight-week trial. Click here for more details.

JANUARY 2003

Interactive Return Service, Inc. v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
A trial team from our Richmond office defended Virginia Tech in this commercial case at the behest of the Attorney General. IRS, Inc. hoped to break into interactive television, and entered into a contract to sponsor research with Virginia Tech. IRS paid the first $ 110,000 of its bills, but then failed to pay the rest. The company claimed it had an agreement with Tech whereby Tech would keep working until it had developed a prototype, which it would then turn over to the company so it could break into the market and make millions. When Tech insisted on full payment, IRS sued and sought $ 158,000,000 in lost profits. There were contract, patent and a variety of other issues.

After a trial in which the court struck plaintiff's only damages expert, the jury gave plaintiff its $ 110,000 back -- but nothing more.

A Gratifying Defense Verdict in Warranty Case - Owen v. Ford
An Orange County Superior Court jury returned a 9-3 verdict for Ford, involving a 2000 Mustang case and an engine spark knock which was allegedly presented to the dealership and not repaired after four repair attempts. The jury rejected plaintiff expert's opinion that spark knock causes "permanent" damage to the engine cylinders which might result in a catastrophic engine failure at any moment.

DECEMBER 2002

L.A. Jury Returns Defense Verdict in Isuzu Rodeo Case;
No Defect Found in Stability or Roof Strength of Isuzu SUV
*A Top Ten Defense Verdict for 2002, according to Los Angeles Daily Journal/San Francisco Recorder*
A jury in downtown Los Angeles found no defect in the stability or roof structure of the 1991 Isuzu Rodeo sport utility vehicle (SUV). Ending the 26-day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict for Isuzu following three-and-a-half hours of deliberation (10-2). For complete report, click here.

Court Judge Finds No Defect in Volvo Truck Brake System
After an intense, three-day trial a defense verdict was returned in U.S. Xpress v. Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Volvo Trucks North America, Inc. Nearly $400,000 worth of communications equipment was burned after the driver drove the truck with the parking brake on, causing enough heat to ignite the trailer. Great Northern claimed the brakes, indicator systems and warnings were defective because they gave no notice to the driver. For complete report, click here.

OCTOBER 2002

Defense Verdict in Tough SF Jurisdiction in Construction Defect Trial
Following a six-week jury trial and four days of deliberation, a San Francisco jury returned a defense verdict in favor of Bay Area Construction Framers, Inc. finding no negligence. The case involved water intrusion claims and construction defect claims at a 20-unit condominium project.

AUGUST 2002

Polaris Wins Unusual ‘Directed’ Defense Verdict in Florida ATV trial -- Defense Maintains No Defect in Handgrip Claim From Accident
Three days into a jury trial, a Palm Beach County Circuit Court directed a verdict in favor of Polaris Industries and PowerSports of Boca Raton, Inc., on August 8, 2002. Riding alone and without a helmet, plaintiff Ralph Brauser lost control of his 1999 Polaris Sportsman 4-wheel ATV on a mountain road and crashed into a tree. The accident occurred on July 3, 1999 near Mineral Bluff, Georgia, leaving Brauser with an alleged closed head injury and permanent knee damage. Brauser claimed one of the vehicle’s handgrips came off during a turn, and caused him to go out of control. For complete report, click here.

JULY 2002

Iowa Supreme Court Sets Precedent in Product Liability Claims by Minors in Auto Case
The Iowa Supreme Court entered a precedent-setting opinion July 17, 2002. This opinion clarifies the applicability of Iowa’s general Statute of Limitations tolling provisions to Iowa’s Product Liability Statute of Repose. This opinion is significant because before Albrecht v. General Motors, there was no clear Iowa law addressing whether the Iowa product liability statute of repose would apply to claims made by minors. Today there is -- it's Albrecht. For complete report, click here.

JUNE 2002

Toyota Wins Jury Defense Verdict in Fire Claim – Defense proves Lexus Did Not Start House Fire
In a case best described as one where plaintiff’s experts leapt to conclusions and never did their homework, Toyota received a defense verdict from a jury in an Ohio court room on June 14, 2002. For complete report, click here.

$2.5 million Ordered Back to CA Schools --Westchester Fire Insurance to reimburse S.E.L.F. in liability dispute
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge has ordered Westchester Fire Insurance Company to return $2,547,846.58 to the California school districts’ Schools Excess Liability Fund (S.E.L.F.). The lawsuit involved the question of whether a School District Risk Sharing Pool or an insurance company was responsible for payment of a liability claim involving a school bus accident in Northern San Fernando Valley, CA. For the complete report, click here.

Court Upholds Jury Verdict for Ford in Rollover Case - No Defect in Roof
On May 21, 2002, the Yolo County Superior Court in Woodland, California, denied a motion for new trial made by plaintiff and affirmed a jury's defense verdict in favor of Ford Motor Company rendered on March 26, 2002, following a seven-week trial. The jury rejected plaintiff's claim that there was a defect in the roof of her 1989 Ford Escort. Plaintiff Sara Granda, 17 years old at the time of the accident in July, 1997, lost control of the Escort on a rural highway, causing the car to roll over four times. For complete report, click here.

DECEMBER 2001

December 4, 2001, Andrews Automotive Litigation Reporter, notes that a state court jury in Nevada rejected defect claims involving the seat belts, roof height and sunroof design in a 1988 Honda Prelude, deciding in favor of the automaker and the seat belt manufacturer. Paul G. Cereghini and Thomas C. Howard , Phoenix partners, were lead counsel in the case. The defendants were granted a directed verdict on a failure-to-warn claim, and the jury took only 2 hours to decide in favor of our clients. The Reporter quoted Paul Cereghini, "The plaintiffs' witnesses were inconsistent with one another, and their testimony was inconsistent with the physical evidence. On the other hand, the physical evidence was unbiased, consistent and very clear in telling us that Mr. Camp was not wearing his seat belt."

NOVEMBER 2001

Andrews Automotive Litigation Reporter, November 20, 2001 reports "WASH. JURY FINDS NO LINK BETWEEN AIR BAG GASES, DEATH OF ASTHMATIC". A state court jury in Washington has returned a verdict for General Motors Corp. in the case of an asthmatic woman whose death after a minor accident was allegedly caused by inhalation of gases from the air bag. GM maintained that the woman's attack was not caused by the chemicals and could have occurred even if the air bag had not activated. The jury returned a 10-2 defense verdict after two days of deliberation. GM was represented by Bowman and Brooke, lead by Vincent Galvin of our San Jose office.

In Andrews' November 6, 2001 issue a defense verdict for our client Polaris Industries is profiled. A Massachusetts state court jury found no defect in a Polaris all-terrain vehicle. Plaintiff claimed that the vehicle had been defectively designed and manufactured, and that Polaris had breached an implied warranty of merchantability. The defendant countered that the suspension component broke as the result of the accident, in which plaintiff tumbled over a three-foot embankment before rolling over. The jury agreed with Polaris, returning a defense verdict at the close of the three-day trial. Polaris was represented by Timothy J. Mattson.

Another headline in the November issue of Andrews Automotive Litigation Reporter read, "FUEL RAIL ASSEMBLY NOT THE CAUSE OF FIRE, ARIZONA JURY SAYS". This case, involving allegations that a defective fuel system in an automobile parked in a garage sparked a fire that caused $450,000 in damages to a home. Jill S. Goldsmith  of our Phoenix office, successfully defended BMW North America in a Maricopa County Superior Court trial. The suit was filed by Allstate Insurance Co. They argued that the fire was caused by a manufacturing defect in the fuel rail, which allowed gasoline to leak onto hot engine surfaces. BMW maintained that its manufacturing and quality control procedures were state of the art, that no defect existed, and that the fire was caused by a gas-fueled clothes dryer or other electrical equipment in the garage. The jury returned a unanimous verdict after 30 minutes of deliberation.