De'Wayne Cory, an incompetent by and through his conservator Betty L. Cory v. Ford Motor Company, Corrinea Cory, et al.
Published: Nov. 12, 2005 | Result Date: Jun. 21, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC275178 Verdict – $22,298,300
Judge
Court
San Bernardino Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Frank P. Kelly III
(Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP)
Scott S. Blackstone
(Law Offices of John A. Hauser)
Daniel S. Rodman
(Snell & Wilmer LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Janice Wexler
(technical)
Anthony Sances Jr.
(technical)
Ted M. Kobayashi
(technical)
Joel S. Rosen
(medical)
Donald Friedman
(technical)
Jan Roughan R.N.
(medical)
Peter Formuzis Ph.D.
(technical)
Defendant
Larry F. Ragan
(technical)
David J. Weiner M.B.A., AM
(technical)
Debora R. Marth
(technical)
Edward L. Workman
(technical)
Keith Friedman
(technical)
Andrew E. Levitt
(technical)
Thomas L. Hedge Jr., M.D.
(medical)
Robert L. Piziali
(technical)
Facts
Plaintiff De'Wayne Cory, 30, was riding in the front passenger seat of a 1985 Ford LTD. Cory was 6'5" tall and had a pre-accident IQ of 43. His sister, defendant Corrinea Cory was operating the vehicle. On Sept. 15, 2002, the Corys were driving on Interstate 5 when Corrinea fell asleep at the wheel in the City of Weed. She was driving at about 70 miles per hour, the speed limit, when she drifted into the center median. Corrinea woke up and overcorrected to the right, which caused her LTD to slide across two lanes of traffic onto the paved shoulder and off the road. Her LTD rolled over once and landed upright. The plaintiff sustained spinal cord injuries, rendering him an incomplete quadriplegic.
The plaintiff sued Ford Motor Co. for products liability and his sister for negligence. His sister filed a cross-claim against Ford. Ford's motion for nonsuit as to the plaintiff's cause of action for negligence was granted, leaving only a strict products liability claim.
Contentions
The plaintiff and his sister contended that the LTD's roof was defective because it crushed inward onto the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that since 1970, Ford knew that it could equip its vehicles with stronger steel-reinforced roofs for only an additional cost of $9 to $12 per vehicle, but chose not to do so.
The LTD was not properly preserved and thus there was substantial dispute over how much the roof crushed in the rollover. Experts from each party attempted to reconstruct the roof crush using different techniques, resulting in significantly different opinions on how much roof crush had actually occurred.
DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR CO.'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant denied that its vehicle was defectively designed. It argued that the roof exceeded government standards. It further claimed that the roof was comparable to other similar vehicles manufactured in the mid-1980s. The defendant also argued that the roof was not substantially crushed in the accident and presented photographic analysis of the pictures taken of the crushed roof before it was towed. Moreover, the defendant argued that the $9 to $12 roof-reinforcement cost would not have prevented the plaintiff's injury especially since he was 6'5" tall. It argued that the plaintiff's injury was not caused by any alleged design defect, but rather, his injuries were caused when the plaintiff hit the roof when the car rolled over, which was due to his sister's negligent driving.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $3.5 million against defendant Ford. Ford offered $350,000 (C.C.P. Section 998). Prior to the involvement of defendant Cory's counsel (Callahan, McCune & Willis) in this case, the plaintiff demanded $100,000 (policy limit) against defendant Corrinea Cory, who did not accept the demand until after it had expired.
Specials in Evidence
$359,436.91 (stipulated cost and amount billed); Medi-Cal and Medicare paid $146,156.12 of this amount
Damages
Plaintiff asked the jury not to discount future medical care regardless of the testimony provided by its economist who testified that the present value of future medical care is $9.2 million. Plaintiff disagreed with the discount rate his economist used and argued that the interest rates would not go up faster than the increase in the costs of medical services. Further, the parties stipulated to the amount of plaintiff's past medical expenses. The billed amount of expenses was $359,436.91, but Medi-Cal and Medicare paid only $146,156.12.
Injuries
The plaintiff suffered spinal injuries, rendering him an incomplete paraplegic, which requires that he receive 24-hour attendant care.
Result
The jury returned a $22,298,326 verdict against defendant Corrinea Cory. The jury returned a defense verdict for Ford. The plaintiff is pursuing an excess verdict case against defendant Corrinea Cory's insurer.
Other Information
There was substantial dispute over how much the roof crushed in the rollover, which in turn resulted in the experts on each side to reach significantly different opinions about how much roof crush had actually occured.
Deliberation
one week
Poll
9-3
Length
nine weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390