Posted on 03/08/2005 9:42:06 PM PST by TheBattman
MEMPHIS, TN - A Tennessee jury has awarded punitive damages of more than $48 million to the family of two Tennessee women killed in a 2002 crash near Corning, Arkansas. The woman was driving a Dodge Caravan, and her family sued the DaimlerChrysler Corporation, which made the vehicle. The judgement came in the second phase of a trial in which the family of Vickie Mohr and her mother, Maurine Heathscott, claimed the vehicle was unreasonably dangerous.
The 38-year-old Mohr, of Cedar Grove, Tennessee, and 76-year-old Heathscott, of Lexington, Tennessee, were killed in a three-vehicle accident on July 5, 2002. The accident happened on U.S. 67 about three miles west of Corning when a sport utility vehicle hit them head on. Mohr was the driver and her mother was in the front passenger seat.
Lawyer Rick Charlton said Mohr's death was attributed to the mini-van's lack of crashworthiness. Jurors agreed and found DaimlerChrysler guilty of intentional or reckless conduct.
How does this show that the vehicle was unreasonably dangerous?
Of course, no-one must look farther than where the trial was held - a city FULL of "Victim mentality".
Had a component on the Caravan failed, thus causing the accident - then I might could see some liability (assuming the vehicle was properly maintaned). BUt in this case ANOTHER vehicle crossed the center line and hit the van head on. The only liability would be the driver of the vehicle that crossed the center line.
For GOD's sake - they were all traveling at HIGHWAY speeds -
Someone please quickly figure out the average IQ of the jury - heck, I'm not sure you would have to take your shoes off to ADD UP they TOTAL IQ of the jury.
What a perfect example of the need for Tort Reform. But in this case, the lawyer brining the suit against Chrylsler should be disbarred and the Jurors should be taken to the woodshed.
I guess this jury was edumacated by the Memphis Public Schools????
And the Tenn. tax on "punitive damages" is???? Heh Heh Heh ( Some states are 50-75%)
I agree that they shouldn't have been awarded anything.
Just curious. How old was this vehicle and why wasn't it equipped with airbags? Isn't that what they are there for - to help someone survive a collision? I'd want to know more about this story but, unless there was some sort of intentional negligence on the part of Chrysler that caused these deaths, I don't see how the jury chose this award (unless they were an Oprah jury).
You can bet Chrysler will appeal.
(Everyone walked away so I can be embullient.)
My '74 Jeep CJ5 opened up a Subaru Forester like a can of beans the other day when the ditz who was driving the Sub slid into my lane on an icy curve. The Sub is a basket case, my CJ sustained a bent high lift jack. (High lifts, by the way, make a nice crumple zone.) After seeing the riceburner come to pieces though, you wouldn't buy one or even ride willingly in one. (I'm having a little white flag with a meatball in the middle painted on the cowling of my Jeep.)
And how many people drive Dodge Caravans for decades without crashing them. Hundreds of thousands. These verdicts are a joke. The only problem here is a loose nut behind the wheel.
I have a 98 Sub Forestor myself, I guess that answers my question how it would do in a head on!
We have to remember the newer cars are made to break apart to protect the occupants. But at the same time, i think i want to spring for a longer hooded car next time, more space to crush!
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:FRIWrBWpDT8J:www.dodgetalk.com/forums/showthread.php%3Fgoto%3Dnewpost%26t%3D46583+%22Maurine+Heathscott%22&hl=en
Statement:
The following statement can be attributed to Steve Hantler, Assistant General Counsel, DaimlerChrysler Corporation:
“This tragedy occurred because an inexperienced 17-year-old driver fell asleep at the wheel and crashed into the Mohr’s vehicle at a devastatingly high speed. As a result the unbelted rear passenger was thrown into the back of the driver’s seat, contributing to the fatal injuries Ms. Mohr sustained.
“While serious accidents often have tragic consequences, this high speed accident highlights why occupants who choose not to wear their seat belts not only put themselves in danger, but can pose an even greater danger to other occupants in the vehicle. Accident reconstruction experts believe the fatal injuries to Vickie Mohr and Maurine Heathscott might have been prevented had all the passengers been wearing their seat belts properly.
“The Mohr’s Dodge Caravan met every applicable federal safety standard as well as DaimlerChrysler Corporation’s own rigorous testing, but the seat belts must be used properly to offer maximum protection to occupants. Real-world evidence demonstrates that minivans are among the safest vehicles on the road, and Chrysler Group minivans are among the best vehicles in the minivan class in safety and security.
"To impose any punitive damages in these circumstances, let alone $48 million, is an especially egregious miscarriage of justice. This award clearly violates the federal due process restrictions on punitive damages recently announced by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"While we share the jury's sympathy with the Mohr family over this tragedy, the outcome of this accident was not the result of any defect with the vehicle. We will appeal this outrageous and
unconstitutional verdict."
Background:
On July 5, 2002, Ms. Vickie Mohr was driving her 2000 Dodge Caravan on U.S. Highway 67 near Corning Arkansas. Her mother, Ms. Maurine Heathscott was sitting in the front passenger seat. All of the physical evidence from the accident indicates that Ms. Heathscott was not wearing a seat belt. Nine-year-old Victoria Mohr, seated in the rear behind the front passenger, was wearing her lap belt only and had slipped the shoulder belt behind her back. Ms. Mohr’s sister, Carolyn Jones, was seated behind the driver and has admitted she was not belted.
While approaching in the opposite lane, 17-year-old Brett McAfee fell asleep behind the wheel of a 1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee. He then drifted into oncoming traffic, sideswiped a 1993 GMC Sierra pickup truck and struck the Dodge Caravan. When the Jeep Grand Cherokee and the minivan collided, the Jeep Grand Cherokee was traveling at approximately 45 m.p.h. while the Caravan was traveling at approximately 30 m.p.h., resulting in a catastrophic collision with a closing speed of over 70 m.p.h.
Tragically, Ms. Mohr and Ms. Heathscott suffered fatal injuries. The coroner’s report concluded that Vickie Mohr was killed due to blunt force trauma to back of the head; experts determined that the trauma was caused when Mohr was struck by the 245-pound unrestrained occupant seated directly behind her, Ms. Jones. Nine-year-old Victoria Mohr sustained an abdominal injury requiring surgery, and Ms. Jones sustained fractures to her left arm and a pelvic fracture.
Brett McAfee was criminally charged with vehicular homicide and pled no contest. The plaintiffs filed suit against DaimlerChrysler Corporation.
On February 14, 2005, a Memphis, Tenn., jury found DaimlerChrysler Corporation 46% at fault for Ms. Mohr's fatal injuries and 55% at fault for Ms. Heathscott's fatal injuries. Brett McAfee, the driver of the Jeep Grand Cherokee, was also found partially responsible for both Ms. Mohr’s and Ms. Heathscott’s fatal injuries. Carolyn Jones, the unrestrained rear passenger behind the driver, was found partially responsible for Ms. Mohr’s death.
DaimlerChrysler Corporation’s portion of the compensatory damages totaled $4.5 million. The jury did not find DaimlerChrysler Corporation at fault for the injuries of the two rear seat passengers, Ms. Jones and Victoria Mohr. On February 24, 2005, following a separate punitive damages proceeding, the jury awarded $48.77 million to Ms. Mohr's estate.
__________________
This award will be knocked down on appeal.
This punitive award is going to the dead women's respective estates, meaning family members have hit the lawsuit lottery, will become millionaires
This award will be knocked down on appeal.
_________
I would think so, plus judges sometimes have the power to unilaterally adjust awards downward. In the name of sanity.
At this rate, all speed limits will have to be reduced to the 5 mph test standard! Good grief! And people question W's tort reform push! Are any of these jurists on the same cases? It would be interesting to see if the lawyers are looking for the right jurists, ones who've been on similar cases.
Before we jump on the jury and claim they are crazy a little facts would be order. How badly did thecar collapse from being hit head on? I would expect that my car if hit would have the entire front end demolisged with possibly the engine in the fron passenger area but still with space to live even though seriously injured. That would be acceptable and understood. However if the entire car collapsed like bread box and afterwards the only thing left of it was the wheels and the lower body frame as a result of the entire top half being taken off I would have a real problem with the integrity of the car, it should at least hopefully stay in one piece. Maybe someone can get the actual pictures before we jump to second guess the jury. Alot of people sit on juries and I don't think they are all idiots, and I know they are privy to a lot of information that we will never see. Sort of like deciding that the Iraq war was a quagmire because you read in the NYT. Just an opinion.
I agree!
Huh? The women didn't die because the minivan was faulty! The front seat passenger wasn't wearing a seatbelt. The backseat passenger behind the driver wasn't either. She crashed into the driver! Nobody would have died if they had worn their seatbelts. How in the world is that Chryslers fault?
"....intentional or reckless conduct."
I think for $50,000,000 the jury should have been able to figure out whether it was intentional or reckless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.