HUNDLEY LAW GROUP » special interrogatories http://www.hundleylaw.com Trial and Appellate Litigation Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:55:06 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 Jablonski v. Ford Motor Company http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/02/jablonski-v-ford-motor-company/ http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/02/jablonski-v-ford-motor-company/#comments Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:02:41 +0000 HLG http://www.hundleylaw.com/?p=75 Jablonski v. Ford Motor Company, No. 5-05-0723 (February 1, 2010). A jury verdict for $43 million, including $15 million in punitive damages is upheld in this products liability action. Plaintiffs, in 1993 Lincoln Town Car, were rear-ended in dead center of car, at about 60 mph; fuel tank was crushed, and pipe wrench in trunk [...]]]> Jablonski v. Ford Motor Company, No. 5-05-0723 (February 1, 2010). A jury verdict for $43 million, including $15 million in punitive damages is upheld in this products liability action. Plaintiffs, in 1993 Lincoln Town Car, were rear-ended in dead center of car, at about 60 mph; fuel tank was crushed, and pipe wrench in trunk pierced fuel tank and caught fire immediately; both were severely burned and one Plaintiff died.Notably, the court declined to extend due-process analysis of excessive punitive-damage awards to liability for punitive damages. Court concluded both parties received fair trial, as jury heard extensive evidence from both sides, and contested issues were fully and fairly presented.

Also of note: (1) The Court held that Defendant failed to submit special interrogatories and thus cannot claim prejudice on claim alleged to be unsupported by sufficient evidence; and (2) Plaintiff was allowed to admit evidence of Defendant’s pre-injury, post-sale safety improvements, as policy considerations that bar admission of post-accident remedial measures are inapplicable.


]]> http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/02/jablonski-v-ford-motor-company/feed/ 0