$150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit

   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #21  
Not only is it impossible, it's not required. You only have to look at the foreseeable scenarios and provide for them if it's feasible. If it's forseeable that the car you have designed will be rearended...and that a couple uncovered bolts could rupture the gas tank and catch fire...and you could spend another few bucks to fix it, and you don't, be prepared to pay when the jury gets hold of it.

You really believe someone who rear-ends a vehicle is only one percent responsible for the accident? The sole reason culpability was affixed in this manner was to vacuum out the "deep pockets" of the manufacturer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #22  
You really believe someone who rear-ends a vehicle is only one percent responsible for the accident? The sole reason culpability was affixed in this manner was to vacuum out the "deep pockets" of the manufacturer.

Negligence of the two drivers is not the issue. The question before the jury, is whether or not the manufacturer was negligent in the way it provided for rear end collisions. The relative negligence of the two drivers is another issue.
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #23  
Score one more for feelings over facts and the loss of logic and critical thinking!

We swim in a sea of idiots, row and live.

row_well_and_live.jpg
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #24  
Negligence of the two drivers is not the issue. The question before the jury, is whether or not the manufacturer was negligent in the way it provided for rear end collisions. The relative negligence of the two drivers is another issue.

So a manufacturer of pointy scissors would be negligent if someone runs with them and ends up impaled? Why surely they should have considered this might happen and make the scissors with rounded ends instead, just in case they don't read the laser etched blade that says, "Don't Run With These **** Scissors!"

Taken to the extreme, all cars should have Nerf lining and massive Nerf bumpers and Nerf side impact shields. The problem is you cannot design out all the ways that innovative idiots will use or misuse your products. So you have insurance and raise your prices to cover the costs. Or you go bare and file bankruptcy if your luck runs out. We all pay for this lunacy through higher prices and worse, a declining manufacturing base.

Life is fraught with dangers that will realistically not be designed and idiot proofed away. If I'm out riding my bicycle and get rear ended, do we sue the bike maker? If the person that runs over my butt happens to be wealthy or has good insurance, I win w/medical coverage paid by then and a million or two for pain and suffering. If they are an illegal immigrant with no insurance and zip for net worth, I lose. What sense does that make?

Edit, so what does **** mean? It's a word that starts with "D" and ends with "N" . . . who'da thunk that was verboten?
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #25  
Negligence of the two drivers is not the issue. The question before the jury, is whether or not the manufacturer was negligent in the way it provided for rear end collisions. The relative negligence of the two drivers is another issue.
Actually, they were to find who was responsible and liable for the death of their child. The guy who rear ended their vehicle doing at least 50MPH, or the company who made a vehicle which conformed to the safety standards at the time it was manufactured.

Not only is it impossible, it's not required. You only have to look at the foreseeable scenarios and provide for them if it's feasible. If it's forseeable that the car you have designed will be rearended...and that a couple uncovered bolts could rupture the gas tank and catch fire...and you could spend another few bucks to fix it, and you don't, be prepared to pay when the jury gets hold of it.
And for another $300/car they could probbaly make it safe in a 70MPH rear end collision, but people are more interested in a lower price, GPS, satellite radio, etc than that.

Aaron Z
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #26  
Will the rear-ending driver will face a civil suit for wrongful death or such? Or maybe there is some agreement that this award is the end of litigation.
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #27  
I'll give this one more shot. The manufacturer is not expected to make a perfect vehicle, nor are they required to provide for every eventuality...but they are required to live up to the legal standards for the industry. If you manufacture a vehicle that you know will catch on fire when rearended, like the Pinto, and you could fix the problem with a $4.00 plate, and you don't, then a jury could find you negligent and get in your pocket big time. You cannot engineer a bicycle that will withstand a 40 mph rearend collision with a car or a truck, nor is the bicycle manufacturer legally required to.

Chrysler was found liable. How they arrived at this exorbitant award no one knows.
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #28  
It's dog eat dog. The bigger dog, the corporation, hopes that they can buy off way before a huge jury award. They will lie, cheat and ultimately kill. Car companies, Big Tobacco, etc. to not have to pay, IF they can get away with it. Moving venue to more favorable location, creating fictional evidence, or more likely shredding the phone records, emails, etc. Whatever it takes to win the pennies they've already spent by not putting in the plate that might have saved the child.
This also leads them to move the workforce elsewhere to save on manufacturing costs, avoid unions, etc.
Lawyers do their jobs trying to get or not allow huge settlements, jury awards, etc. Awards are often overturned or greatly reduced in retrials, appeals, etc.
Juries are emotional and unpredictable; another reason to settle beforehand if at all possible. The big awards, to the public seem like outrageous money, most often it's petty cash to the defendant.

Anyone remember Wall Street, the big banks and gazillions of dollars stolen, ponzi schemed, insider traded, mortgage fraud, you name it? Where are all these guys? Jail? HA! No. No penalties that would cripple the banks, brokers, hedge fund schemers, or the ones who bet on both the failure, and the successes while it was all going on.
These guys jumped and sailed parachutes from the California electric fraud to the New York, Wall Street banks and continue to do business today, with no recourse.

And let's not get started on the negligence suits against drug companies and doctors alike. They stick together because that is how the game is rigged. When was the last time you heard of a doctor throwing a colleague under the bus for screwing up? Likely never. They don't want it to happen to them, so why do it to others?
 
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #29  
I am not a lawyer and have no need to defend them but I think they often times take the brunt of the criticism in these cases. When in fact, it was the jury that made this decision. You know, a jury of our peers. Yes, a jury of our neighbors, relatives and friends, just like us.

I too wonder what a jury thinks sometimes but I just don't blame the lawyers. All they can do is make an argument, its the jury that sets damage awards.

Exactly! The jurors heard the evidence, we didn't...but few here seem to be supporting the "peer" review process we have in our court system. However, much railing against the amorphous "them" who are out to get "us" in nefarious ways. Yet when the jury goes after "them" the jury is questioned. Guess it's just fun to be against everybody...big business, big government and our neighbors on the jury. I note that Chrysler agreed there was a problem:

The company in 2013 agreed to recall millions of Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty SUVs with model years ranging from 1993 to 2007 to address concerns about their fuel tanks. The Grand Cherokee at the center of the Georgia lawsuit is among a set of vehicles the company is inspecting as part of a ç”°ustomer satisfaction campaign in lieu of a recall. The company is installing trailer hitches on the backs of Jeeps to add protection in lower-speed collisions.
 
Last edited:
   / $150M Award in Chrysler Lawsuit #30  
It's dog eat dog. The bigger dog, the corporation, hopes that they can buy off way before a huge jury award. They will lie, cheat and ultimately kill. Car companies, Big Tobacco, etc. to not have to pay, IF they can get away with it. Moving venue to more favorable location, creating fictional evidence, or more likely shredding the phone records, emails, etc. Whatever it takes to win the pennies they've already spent by not putting in the plate that might have saved the child.
This also leads them to move the workforce elsewhere to save on manufacturing costs, avoid unions, etc.
Lawyers do their jobs trying to get or not allow huge settlements, jury awards, etc. Awards are often overturned or greatly reduced in retrials, appeals, etc.
Juries are emotional and unpredictable; another reason to settle beforehand if at all possible. The big awards, to the public seem like outrageous money, most often it's petty cash to the defendant.

Anyone remember Wall Street, the big banks and gazillions of dollars stolen, ponzi schemed, insider traded, mortgage fraud, you name it? Where are all these guys? Jail? HA! No. No penalties that would cripple the banks, brokers, hedge fund schemers, or the ones who bet on both the failure, and the successes while it was all going on.
These guys jumped and sailed parachutes from the California electric fraud to the New York, Wall Street banks and continue to do business today, with no recourse.

And let's not get started on the negligence suits against drug companies and doctors alike. They stick together because that is how the game is rigged. When was the last time you heard of a doctor throwing a colleague under the bus for screwing up? Likely never. They don't want it to happen to them, so why do it to others?

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
 
Top