This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Product Liability
Wrongful Death

Snyder v. Winston Tire Company, et al.

Published: Jun. 2, 2004 | Result Date: Apr. 15, 2004 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: TC015579 Verdict –  $0

Judge

Arthur M. Lew

Court

L.A. Superior Compton


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Daniel Dell'Osso


Defendant

Paul R. Flaherty

Peter J. Gates
(Gates, Gonter,Guy, Proudfoot & Muench LLP)

William T. DelHagen

Eric P. Weiss
(Scali Rasmussen, PC)


Experts

Plaintiff

Thomas Glapponi
(technical)

Mark B. Shattuck
(technical)

Defendant

James D. Gardner
(technical)

Harold J. Herzlich
(technical)

Gerald P. Bretting
(technical)

Jason A. Arst
(technical)

Facts

The plaintiff's decedent, a young commercial banker, was returning to San Francisco from San Diego with a friend, Amber Cagle, at the wheel of his car. The left tire suffered an impact which caused the tire to fail several hundred miles later, while traveling between 80-90 mph. The driver over-corrected, causing the vehicle to leave the road and roll several times, inflicting fatal injuries on the decedent Snyder. The decedent's parents sued the defendant Winston Tire Company, which allegedly sold the tire; Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, which manufactured the tire, and the driver Amber Cagle, alleging causes of action in strict products liability against Winston and Goodyear and negligence against all defendants. Because the plaintiffs did not articulate an independent negligence claim against the defendant Winston in discovery, Goodyear assumed Winston's defense.

Other Information

Though the jury determined that the tire was defectively manufactured, they did not feel that the defect was a substantial factor in causing the accident.

Deliberation

four days

Length

13 days


#95854

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390