| ||||||
|
Spencer T. Kuvin Legal Blog - working at www.800goldlaw.com, the Law Offices of Craig Goldenfarb, P.A. as the Litigation Director/Lead Trial Attorney.
Showing posts with label Ford. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ford. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Cohen Kuvin Breaking News
Friday, May 20, 2011
Legislative changes to Crashworthiness Cases in Florida
On Wednesday, May 4, 2011, the Florida Legislature passed SB 142, a bill that significantly impacts all current and future products liability cases against auto manufacturers in Florida. Over the past three years, Cohen & Kuvin, LLC has serves on the front lines with a coalition of products liability experts, focused on countering the efforts of major car manufacturers' to reverse the states high court ruling in D'Amario v. Ford. Despite our best efforts, the auto lobby prevailed and successfully passed legislation designed to reduce their accountability and increase the burden on motorists who are victimized by defective products.
We have summarized the bill below to help our peers understand the legislation and the retro-active impact it can have on your current case load.
How does Senate Bill 142 change existing precedents in the law?
Senate Bill 142 reverses the Florida Supreme Court ruling in D'Amario v. Ford and undermines the crashworthiness doctrine. As you know the crashworthiness doctrine holds that the manufacturer of the vehicle is liable for the enhanced injuries sustained from the second collision. SB 142 protects the automobile manufacturers by allowing them to escape full liability for a defective product by placing blame on the tortfeasor who caused the initial accident instead.
How does SB 142 affect cases that I have currently filed?
It is unknown whether or not the retroactive clause of this law will ultimately be held unconstitutional, but certainly all objections to its application to cases currently in suit should be made and reserved. In many cases, the original tortfeasor's underlying policy has already been tendered and accepted based upon sound legal reasoning and advice by the attorney representing the injured party. To now have the tortfeasor listed on the verdict form as a fabre defendant would be fundamentally unfair to the injured party. That said, we anticipate many trial judges will rule the new law applicable to any case filed, and the actions and conduct of the tortfeasor leading up to the accident will most likely be allowed before the jury.
How does SB 142 affect future products cases?
Going forward, the conduct of the tortfeasor which causes the accident will need to be discovered and thoroughly weighted much more carefully than in the past. Rather than being able to accept his/her policy limits for any damage caused by the original action the tortfeasor must be viewed as a potential defendant in the crashworthy case. It will be vital that settlements for underlying auto policy limits be fully evaluated and not be rushed.
What can I do to protect my clients' rights if they have a product liability case?
Car manufacturers have just earned a golden opportunity to deflect responsibility to the original tortfeasor, and shirk their own obligations to build safe vehicles. SB 142 will reduce their incentive to be innovative and vigilant when it comes to vehicle safety, because they will now be able to shift blame and manipulate juries.
The climate in Florida has changed dramatically, and the consumers of this state are defenseless against the politicians and corporate lobbyists that seek profits over sound public policy. As advocates, we have a duty to understand the nuances of these decisions, and take the appropriate measures required to provide our clients with the best representation. The auto industry touted personal responsibility of motorists as justification for SB 142, all the while, shedding their own accountability.
As attorneys specializing in automotive safety and consumer justice advocates, it is our personal responsibility to ensure the rights of clients are protected. We hope this information is helpful to you and your clients, and encourage you to contact our firm with any questions about the passage of SB 142.
Cohen & Kuvin, LLC
Consumer Justice Attorneys
955 NW 17th Ave, Bldg. D.
Delray Beach, FL 33445
stk@cohenkuvin.com
http://www.cohenkuvin.com/
We have summarized the bill below to help our peers understand the legislation and the retro-active impact it can have on your current case load.
How does Senate Bill 142 change existing precedents in the law?
Senate Bill 142 reverses the Florida Supreme Court ruling in D'Amario v. Ford and undermines the crashworthiness doctrine. As you know the crashworthiness doctrine holds that the manufacturer of the vehicle is liable for the enhanced injuries sustained from the second collision. SB 142 protects the automobile manufacturers by allowing them to escape full liability for a defective product by placing blame on the tortfeasor who caused the initial accident instead.
How does SB 142 affect cases that I have currently filed?
It is unknown whether or not the retroactive clause of this law will ultimately be held unconstitutional, but certainly all objections to its application to cases currently in suit should be made and reserved. In many cases, the original tortfeasor's underlying policy has already been tendered and accepted based upon sound legal reasoning and advice by the attorney representing the injured party. To now have the tortfeasor listed on the verdict form as a fabre defendant would be fundamentally unfair to the injured party. That said, we anticipate many trial judges will rule the new law applicable to any case filed, and the actions and conduct of the tortfeasor leading up to the accident will most likely be allowed before the jury.
How does SB 142 affect future products cases?
Going forward, the conduct of the tortfeasor which causes the accident will need to be discovered and thoroughly weighted much more carefully than in the past. Rather than being able to accept his/her policy limits for any damage caused by the original action the tortfeasor must be viewed as a potential defendant in the crashworthy case. It will be vital that settlements for underlying auto policy limits be fully evaluated and not be rushed.
What can I do to protect my clients' rights if they have a product liability case?
Car manufacturers have just earned a golden opportunity to deflect responsibility to the original tortfeasor, and shirk their own obligations to build safe vehicles. SB 142 will reduce their incentive to be innovative and vigilant when it comes to vehicle safety, because they will now be able to shift blame and manipulate juries.
The climate in Florida has changed dramatically, and the consumers of this state are defenseless against the politicians and corporate lobbyists that seek profits over sound public policy. As advocates, we have a duty to understand the nuances of these decisions, and take the appropriate measures required to provide our clients with the best representation. The auto industry touted personal responsibility of motorists as justification for SB 142, all the while, shedding their own accountability.
As attorneys specializing in automotive safety and consumer justice advocates, it is our personal responsibility to ensure the rights of clients are protected. We hope this information is helpful to you and your clients, and encourage you to contact our firm with any questions about the passage of SB 142.
Cohen & Kuvin, LLC
Consumer Justice Attorneys
955 NW 17th Ave, Bldg. D.
Delray Beach, FL 33445
stk@cohenkuvin.com
http://www.cohenkuvin.com/
Labels:
crashworthiness,
D'Amario,
florida,
Ford,
product liability
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Mississippi jury awards deceased baseball player’s family $131 million in retrial
New York Mets prospect Brian Cole was killed in a 2001 Ford Explorer rollover crash after he was thrown from the vehicle despite wearing a seatbelt.
PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. And LAUREL, Miss.—Today a jury awarded Gregory Cole $131 million in the retrial of his case against Ford Motor Company, which does not include punitive damages. Attorneys for Cole argued that a defective seat belt loosened during a rollover accident and caused the death of his baseball player son, Brian, in 2001, when the younger Cole was driving his father’s Ford Explorer from Florida to Mississippi to return the vehicle to him after spring training.
Brian Cole was a promising 22 year old outfielder and New York Mets prospect at the time of his death. It is the third trial for Cole vs. Watson Quality Ford. The case resulted in a hung jury in February of this year.
Cole and his 17 year old cousin, Ryan, were traveling westbound on State Highway 8, near the Florida-Georgia border, when a car veered into their lane and Cole swerved to avoid it, losing control of the Explorer, which rolled over, his lawyers argued, due to the vehicle’s faulty design. He was then thrown from the vehicle despite having his seat belt properly fastened, which, according to Mr. Cole’s attorneys, is a widely disputed problem in Ford SUVs in addition to the alleged rollover tendency, especially when a tire has blown.
Labels:
Attorney,
cohen kuvin,
delray beach,
Ford,
lawsuit,
lawyers,
Spencer Kuvin
Friday, August 27, 2010
BREAKING NEWS - FORD WINDSTAR RECALL
![]() |
| Ford Windstar |
Ford Motor Company (Ford) has announced a voluntary recall of 575,000 model year 1997 – 2003 Windstar minivans for rear axle fractures from corrosion due to the design. Axle fractures on both the right and left side have been identified and affect vehicle handling, which increases risk of crash, injury or death. The recall was instigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) after it opened a preliminary investigation in May 2010. The federal regulators had received over 200 reports of rear axle fracture due to the design, which had resulted in 2 crashes; however, the amount of complaints has now risen to 950.
The recall for the Windstar – which is no longer in production – applies to vehicles in 21 states (Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin), the District of Columbia and Canada where road salt corrosion is thought to be more common.
Ford will notify affected owners in the very near future and ask them to bring their vehicles to their local dealers for inspection and any necessary repairs. Ford dealers at no charge to customers will reinforce the axles of the affected vehicles as parts are available. If it’s determined the axle can’t be reinforced, it will be replaced as soon as parts are available. Ford will provide for rental vehicles for customers until the rear axle of their vehicle has been replaced.
Owners are encouraged to contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153) or go to www.safercar.gov, with any questions or concerns surrounding this or any other recall or safety campaign.
Spencer Kuvin
Cohen & Kuvin, LLC
http://www.cohenkuvin.com/
stk@cohenkuvin.com
Labels:
Attorney,
cohen kuvin,
delray beach,
Ford,
lawsuit,
lawyer,
Spencer Kuvin,
windstar
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

