Explorer class action may hit Ford hard

Court Alerts

[##_1L|1192370569.jpg|width="130" height="130" alt=""|_##]A lawsuit set for trial next month in Sacramento, Calif., claims Ford Motor Co. deceived consumers about the safety of its Explorer sport-utility vehicles and threatens more than $2 billion in profits Ford earned from Explorers built in the 1990s and sold in California. The class action, brought on behalf of more than 414,000 Explorer buyers, is so large that it puts the automaker at risk of collapse, a Ford defense lawyer said last week after a final pretrial hearing.

The trial is scheduled to start Monday before Superior Court Judge David DeAlba, who will decide the case without a jury.

Ford lost $12.7 billion last year, said Malcolm Wheeler, a Denver attorney who heads Ford's trial team. "This is a company that has had to lay off thousands of employees, a company struggling with a $3.5-billion negative net worth," Wheeler said.

Tab Turner - a Little Rock, Ark., lawyer who pioneered SUV rollover lawsuits - will be the plaintiffs' lead trial counsel in the Sacramento case. "This vehicle is one of the most dangerous vehicles ever produced in this country," said Turner, who first brought SUV rollover lawsuits involving the Ford Bronco II and Explorers.

Marketed as a replacement for family station wagons, the Explorers built in the 1990s have a tendency to flip over during evasive maneuvers at speeds over 40 mph, he said. Ford knew of the Explorer's problems but decided it was more profitable to produce the vehicle without changing its design, he said.

The class of plaintiffs includes California residents who bought, owned or leased a 1991-2001 model-year Ford Explorer, new or used, between 1990 and Aug. 9, 2000.

The plaintiffs' attorneys claim Ford's deception cost the state's car buyers about $500million because the value of their vehicles fell once the alleged defects became widely known. In addition, the plaintiffs are seeking a return of profits Ford earned from its alleged wrongdoing. According to the plaintiffs' lawyers, Ford reaped profits of $2.135 billion on sales in California from 1990 to 2000.

Ford lawyer Wheeler said it was the tires, not the Explorers, that were the problem and plaintiffs' lawyers were simply trying to extract millions more from Ford. He said the Explorer had been deemed safe by Consumer Reports magazine and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Out of 32 Explorer product-liability cases that had gone to trial, Ford had won 26 of them, he said.

Related listings

  • Court limits gender pay discrimination lawsuits

    Court limits gender pay discrimination lawsuits

    Court Alerts 05/29/2007

    [##_1L|1169930246.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]The US Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that an employee cannot bring a lawsuit for pay discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for allegedly discriminatory actions that occur...

  • Ga. Judge: Keep Potter Books in School

    Ga. Judge: Keep Potter Books in School

    Court Alerts 05/29/2007

    [##_1L|1160040369.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]The adventures of boy wizard Harry Potter can stay in Gwinnett County school libraries, despite a mother's objections, a judge ruled Tuesday. Laura Mallory, who argued the popular fiction serie...

  • Ex-youth league official pleads guilty

    Ex-youth league official pleads guilty

    Court Alerts 05/26/2007

    A former Casper Youth Baseball official has pleaded guilty to one count of embezzling money from the organization.As part of a plea agreement, four other embezzlement charges against Keith Hood were dropped, Assistant Natrona County District Attorney...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read