Does anyone know if the woman was hit by the gravel truck because she pulled out in front of a vehicle that was so heavy it could not stop in sufficient time? If that’s the case; then the truck driver, who has to feel terrible about the accident, would not be 100% to blame. Elderly drivers typically misjudge distance.
Ford will have no problem prevailing in its appeal. I’m a Cobb County resident and occasional juror, and yes, someone usually needs to say, whoa, back up the train, who’s actually responsible for what happened. Having been that person, and having witnessed dramatic about faces in the jury room, I am confident that this decision won’t survive…assuming we’ve been given the pertinent facts. In the meantime, I’ll investigate other sources for this story.
Not sure – I’m with you! My husband is an ex-truck driver and could tell you some horror stories of how drivers love to cut off trucks. Not only is slowing and stopping distance an issue, but the majority of drivers out there aren’t aware that these huge trucks have to downshift before they can slow down or stop. I don’t get it – hit the brakes? Then we get a jack-knifed truck….when will people ever learn? I’d like to see more information on this. What in the world would lead the jury to conclude that the “defective” seat caused this woman’s death? Did she in fact cut the truck off? How about the truck driver? Did he fall asleep at the wheel? Does have have a class “A” license or equivelent? Was he drinking or under the influence? There has to be some compelling evidence shown to the jury that they would rule in favor of the plaintiff – perhaps the car was under an extended warranty plan and Ford failed to repair the problem?
“A Cobb County jury has issued a $3 million verdict against Ford Motor Co. in the death of a woman whose seat back broke when her Ford Tempo was rear-ended. The verdict, issued, is the latest in more than 70 lawsuits against Ford over how the back of the Tempo’s front seat breaks from its mountings and falls backward in rear-end accidents. The plaintiffs argued Ford knew or should have known the design was defective. The civil jury of nine women and three men awarded the victim’s adult children compensatory damages, but not punitive damages. That typically indicates the panel did not think the plaintiffs had presented sufficient proof that Ford knew the seat was defective and failed to recall or repair it.”
don’t lie. As wudchuck indicated, there is a lot a play here besides an allegedly defective seat. Force = mass(acceleration). The loaded gravel truck is a lot of mass; the impact with the Tempo (or Taurus) had to make it accelerate at a high rate of speed. There had to be a major chance in velocity, and then add going over an embankment….WOW. The jury got this one wrong!
Well the 94 ford don’t meet to days auto standards And ford motor co cant help it that she was driving a car so old If it was a new car i could understand ford being sued or almost new car. As to her being 76 years old she may have some health problems that entered into the accident. stopping a truck that big empty is almost like stopping a train and a lot of people don’t know this the lawsuit should have been between the driver’s and family’s ford should not have been a part of it as to the seat breaking with a truck loaded with gravel rear ending any kind of car its coming apart fast.
well, we look back at this article and can only say — WOW! i used to be an otr driver trainer for a trucking company for 7 yrs. i understand trucks and the other vehicles on the road. my dad was a provost marshall (similar to a chief of police, except ARMY). even if the lady stopped on her brakes suddenly, it’s still the guy behind whom is at-fault. reason: for one, you are supposed to give enough room between vehicles. two – i know traffic conditions sometimes narrow our field of driving because we are so much in a hurry that if we see an inch we take mile. this hinders the PROFESSIONAL Driver, from doing our jobs – being safe and delivering our load. its still the truckers fault. there are times, occassionally, we can prove that the blame totally is the other driver. in this case, from what i have read: DRIVER RESPONSIBILITY of the TRUCK DRIVER and of course the company whom he was driving for. FORD, well, problem is as stated earlier, this is an older car. they are not made to current standards and if you own one, then you are subjecting yourself to be hurt worse. granted we can never protect ourselves 100% from any injury. as the other person said, age 76, she was not as nimble or in excellent health, good muscle mass and so forth. someone that old, probably enjoys his/her vehicle and is not willing to part with it. its part of society, where we relish the past items that has brought us fond memories. i can understand the loss of a loved one – i have lost my dad. but in this case, i think they went too far and FORD should win on their appeal.
After reading the comments on this article, I am absolutely horrified. It is morons like these commentators that are destroying confidence in our legal system. Twelve jurors and a well qualified judge heard the evidence in this case and came to a conclusion based on that evidence. Without the benefit of one shred of evidence, this group of judgmental and ignorant commentators claim the jurors are the idiots. Boy do we live in a country of stupid people.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Does anyone know if the woman was hit by the gravel truck because she pulled out in front of a vehicle that was so heavy it could not stop in sufficient time? If that’s the case; then the truck driver, who has to feel terrible about the accident, would not be 100% to blame. Elderly drivers typically misjudge distance.
Ford will have no problem prevailing in its appeal. I’m a Cobb County resident and occasional juror, and yes, someone usually needs to say, whoa, back up the train, who’s actually responsible for what happened. Having been that person, and having witnessed dramatic about faces in the jury room, I am confident that this decision won’t survive…assuming we’ve been given the pertinent facts. In the meantime, I’ll investigate other sources for this story.
Not sure – I’m with you! My husband is an ex-truck driver and could tell you some horror stories of how drivers love to cut off trucks. Not only is slowing and stopping distance an issue, but the majority of drivers out there aren’t aware that these huge trucks have to downshift before they can slow down or stop. I don’t get it – hit the brakes? Then we get a jack-knifed truck….when will people ever learn? I’d like to see more information on this. What in the world would lead the jury to conclude that the “defective” seat caused this woman’s death? Did she in fact cut the truck off? How about the truck driver? Did he fall asleep at the wheel? Does have have a class “A” license or equivelent? Was he drinking or under the influence? There has to be some compelling evidence shown to the jury that they would rule in favor of the plaintiff – perhaps the car was under an extended warranty plan and Ford failed to repair the problem?
“A Cobb County jury has issued a $3 million verdict against Ford Motor Co. in the death of a woman whose seat back broke when her Ford Tempo was rear-ended. The verdict, issued, is the latest in more than 70 lawsuits against Ford over how the back of the Tempo’s front seat breaks from its mountings and falls backward in rear-end accidents. The plaintiffs argued Ford knew or should have known the design was defective. The civil jury of nine women and three men awarded the victim’s adult children compensatory damages, but not punitive damages. That typically indicates the panel did not think the plaintiffs had presented sufficient proof that Ford knew the seat was defective and failed to recall or repair it.”
don’t lie. As wudchuck indicated, there is a lot a play here besides an allegedly defective seat. Force = mass(acceleration). The loaded gravel truck is a lot of mass; the impact with the Tempo (or Taurus) had to make it accelerate at a high rate of speed. There had to be a major chance in velocity, and then add going over an embankment….WOW. The jury got this one wrong!
I wonder what Henry Ford or other inventors would say. I guess it would help him understand why Americans won’t be making cars, in 20 years.
Well the 94 ford don’t meet to days auto standards And ford motor co cant help it that she was driving a car so old If it was a new car i could understand ford being sued or almost new car. As to her being 76 years old she may have some health problems that entered into the accident. stopping a truck that big empty is almost like stopping a train and a lot of people don’t know this the lawsuit should have been between the driver’s and family’s ford should not have been a part of it as to the seat breaking with a truck loaded with gravel rear ending any kind of car its coming apart fast.
well, we look back at this article and can only say — WOW! i used to be an otr driver trainer for a trucking company for 7 yrs. i understand trucks and the other vehicles on the road. my dad was a provost marshall (similar to a chief of police, except ARMY). even if the lady stopped on her brakes suddenly, it’s still the guy behind whom is at-fault. reason: for one, you are supposed to give enough room between vehicles. two – i know traffic conditions sometimes narrow our field of driving because we are so much in a hurry that if we see an inch we take mile. this hinders the PROFESSIONAL Driver, from doing our jobs – being safe and delivering our load. its still the truckers fault. there are times, occassionally, we can prove that the blame totally is the other driver. in this case, from what i have read: DRIVER RESPONSIBILITY of the TRUCK DRIVER and of course the company whom he was driving for. FORD, well, problem is as stated earlier, this is an older car. they are not made to current standards and if you own one, then you are subjecting yourself to be hurt worse. granted we can never protect ourselves 100% from any injury. as the other person said, age 76, she was not as nimble or in excellent health, good muscle mass and so forth. someone that old, probably enjoys his/her vehicle and is not willing to part with it. its part of society, where we relish the past items that has brought us fond memories. i can understand the loss of a loved one – i have lost my dad. but in this case, i think they went too far and FORD should win on their appeal.
After reading the comments on this article, I am absolutely horrified. It is morons like these commentators that are destroying confidence in our legal system. Twelve jurors and a well qualified judge heard the evidence in this case and came to a conclusion based on that evidence. Without the benefit of one shred of evidence, this group of judgmental and ignorant commentators claim the jurors are the idiots. Boy do we live in a country of stupid people.