In 2009, Toyota began recalling millions of vehicles
following numerous reports of sudden, unintended acceleration problems. Not surprisingly, hundreds of lawsuits were
filed against Toyota by drivers of the recalled vehicles. Toyota agreed to a $1 billion dollar
settlement to resolve lawsuits seeking economic losses attributable to the
recall, but has declined to enter any settlement agreements with plaintiffs who
have filed suits claiming damages for injury or wrongful death. That is changing following a $3 million jury
verdict in Oklahoma.
Prior to the Oklahoma case, Toyota won all of the
unintended acceleration cases that proceeded to trial. In those cases, Toyota consistently
maintained that its vehicles’ designs were not flawed, and, instead, blamed the
unintended accelerations on the drivers, stuck accelerators, or floor mats that
trapped the gas pedal.
Toyota’s wave of victories in these suits ended when an injured
driver and the family of a deceased passenger filed an unintended acceleration
suit against Toyota when the driver’s 2005 Camry accelerated through an
intersection and crashed into an embankment.
The plaintiffs claimed that the Camry’s software connected to the
electronic throttle-control system was the cause of the unintended
acceleration. Toyota’s lawyers defended arguing
that the driver pumped the gas pedal instead of the brakes. The Oklahoma jury was not persuaded by Toyota
and awarded a combined $3 million in damages to the plaintiffs.
Those who have been following the Toyota litigation find
this verdict to be significant for several reasons. For one, no other plaintiffs had ever claimed
that the acceleration was due to Toyota’s electronics. This novel theory is noteworthy because
Toyota had never recalled any of its vehicles for problems related to its
onboard electronics. This new theory of
liability also has garnered the attention experts in electronic source coding
and others within the industry. The verdict
is also significant due to the size of the verdict rendered in such a
conservative jurisdiction.
Since the verdict, Toyota has indicated its willingness
to enter into an intensive settlement process.
Some maintain that the Oklahoma verdict was the likely impetus in
getting Toyota to the negotiating table.
No comments:
Post a Comment