|
WASHINGTON
JURY REJECTS UNIROYAL TIRE DEFECT CLAIMS
APRIL 27, 2004
LEWIS COUNTY
On
April 23, 2004, a Lewis County, Washington jury rejected claims
of tire design and manufacturing defects against Michelin North
America, Inc., deciding that a Uniroyal Tiger Paw XTM tire manufactured
at Michelin’s Ardmore, Oklahoma plant was safe and not defective.
After deliberating three full days in a trial that lasted seven
weeks, the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant Michelin
but against the defendant driver and owner of the subject vehicle
on which the incident tire was mounted, awarding approximately 9.8
million dollars to five plaintiffs. After the jury verdict, Michelin
lead trial attorney, James J. Yukevich of the Los Angeles law firm
of Yukevich Calfo & Cavanaugh, stated: “In spite of a difficult
litigation climate for tire companies due to the recent Firestone
problems, Michelin and Uniroyal proved that this tire was safe.
In spite of serious injuries to the plaintiffs, the jury found in
Michelin’s favor. Based upon the evidence, it was the right thing
to do.”
Plaintiffs
Dina, Dan, Adrian, Angelica, Ben, and Camelia Tepei, all Canadian
citizens, pursued the action in Lewis County, Washington, the
site of the accident, against their father, Petru Tepei and Michelin
North America. The plaintiffs alleged various injuries in a rollover
accident involving a Toyota Previa van driven by their father
in which the plaintiffs were passengers. Three of the five plaintiffs
were ejected from the van. Although all were unbelted, Washington
law did not permit the jury to be advised of or consider that
plaintiffs were unrestrained. Among the injuries alleged by plaintiffs
were spinal injuries, a broken arm leaving severe disfigurement
and diminished use, two claims of severe brain injury, and a fifth
plaintiff with allegedly disfiguring facial scarring.
Tire Defect Allegations
Plaintiffs alleged that the subject tire, manufactured in 1990,
was defective in manufacture. Plaintiffs also alleged that the
subject tire was defective in design because it lacked a nylon
cap ply, a tire component often used in high speed rated tires.
The defendant driver also advanced a manufacturing defect theory,
claiming that an unidentified contaminate was manufactured into
the tire.
Michelin’s Defense
Following a seven-week trial in which Michelin experts and outside
scientists explained the science of tire manufacture and demonstrated
to the jury why the tire was not defective, the jury found the
tire to have been both safely designed and manufactured, and that
Michelin and Uniroyal were not liable. Michelin’s independent
expert, Gary Bolden of Standard Testing Labs in Akron, Ohio, presented
evidence that the subject tire failed due to impact damage that
occurred approximately one thousand miles before the failure.
Further, the tire had been run in an overdeflected condition (underinflated
and/or overloaded), for a substantial period of time during its
life, making it weaker and more susceptible to impact damage.
Michelin countered plaintiffs’ defect allegations by establishing
that nylon cap plies are used most commonly in high speed rated
tires, and further, there is no evidence that cap plies prevent
tread and belt detachments, especially when a tire has been misused
or abused. As to plaintiffs’ manufacturing defect theory, Michelin
was able to establish that the tire’s architecture fell within
the manufacturer’s specifications and tolerances. Plaintiffs’
tire expert Rex Grogan was cross-examined extensively concerning
the basis of his opinions. According to Yukevich; “Grogan was
dead wrong on all his opinions. He has also been found to have
perjured himself in another recent case - this is a man not worthy
of belief.”
Defendant Petru Tepei abandoned his contamination theory during
the trial after court ordered testing, conducted at Michelin’s
request, confirmed that the alleged “contaminate” was not manufactured
into the tire. This independent testing confirmed Michelin’s expert
Jerry Leyden’s findings that the substance was in fact chitinous
material, a bug that had contacted the tire after the tread separation
and air out, and not during the manufacturing process.
The Verdict
After deliberating for three full days, the jury returned its
verdict and concluded that no defect existed in the subject tire.
The jury then found that the defendant, Petru Tepei, was negligent
in failing to properly maintain his tires. The 9.8 million dollar
verdict against Mr. Tepei is the largest in Lewis County history.
Counsel:
Counsel for defendants Michelin North America, Inc. and Uniroyal
Goodrich Tire, Company: Yukevich Calfo & Cavanaugh, by James Yukevich,
Todd Cavanaugh, and Cristina Ciminelli Los Angeles, CA
BACK
TO PRESS RELEASES AND ARTICLES
|
