Rodas' widow is suing Porsche saying that the car was travelling at 55mph and was an unsafe car at any speed.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...Top+Stories%29

 

That lawsuit is going nowhere. On the other hand, it might turn out to be quite embarassing inasmuch as it could reveal unrefutable evidence that Mr. Rodas was behaving recklessly.

 

I imagine she was talked into that by an attorney and some clueless friends. Its going nowhere....except to deplete her bank account some and help her attorney get a new Porsche of his own.

 

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but 55 is still over the speed limit for that stretch of road. I'm not sure of the exact limit there but it probably 35/40. 55 seems like a made up number to seem like yes they were going a little faster than they should but not to fast lol. I sure wish we had a judicial system where the defendant can sue the plantiff in cases such as these for the costs of defending oneself.

 

I am sure the attorney want one for himself or maybe a new 918. I dought the car was going 55, because if it was that car must have been made out of cardboard and duck tape. I think someone is going to have their feelings hurt and it aint going to be PCNA.

 

I believe I read somewhere that the tires on that car were well beyond the manufacturer's recommendations for when they should have been changed. I suppose to that point the plaintiff's attorney would say that Porsche failed to timely send a reminder.

This was a horrific accident and it's tragic that two people lost their lives. I don't believe for a moment that the police's analysis that the vehicle was traveling at a very hight rate of speed was wrong. However, to entertain the plaintiff's argument for a moment that the vehicle was unsafe, it strikes me that the person in the best position to make that determination would have been the owner/operator at that time, Mr. Rodas, a professional driver. So, then, either he was reckless to drive a vehicle on the street that he knew was unsafe and, therefore, contributorily negligent, or the vehicle was safe to drive.

 

Yes the tires (rear at least) were worn and beyond replacement interval.

 

Agreed this was a horrible accident. Who knows if USA Today got the reporting right, but here are the salient points:

"...lawsuit says the vehicle lacked a proper crash cage and safety features in the gas tank that would have saved both men's lives.

The lawsuit also contends that a failure in the car's suspension system forced it to careen out of control and strike three trees while driving down a street in Santa Clarita, California."

Now it strikes me that arguing about the safety cage and gas tank issues is straightforward: either cars manufactured in 2005 typically had those features or they did not. If not (which I suspect) then as a juror I'd say "Tragic, but not PCNA's fault."

As to the suspension failure, I presume that a battalion of expert witnesses from each side will at best (from plaintiff's perspective) create doubt in the minds of jurors. I would think the forensic evidence would be quite interesting: a) Did the suspension fail causing the vehicle to lose control? or b) did the vehicle either lose control or perhaps get out of shape, get off the road, at which point no suspension is going to save a catastrophe?

Does anyone know if authorities recovered any "black box" data from the moments before the crash?

 

Lawsuits can assert anything, and usually do in the hope that someting will resonnate with a clueless juror.

 

I read that the "Black Box" was recovered at the scene and later sent to Porsche for analysis.

 

remember, its not whats right or wrong, its what can be proven in a Civil Court to a Jury of your peers!! If A great trial attorney can get a partial blame out of Porsche then they are held liable and hence $$$.

The pockets are deep....

 

Tactically, Porsche should have abstained from any involvement in analyzing the crash wreckage (alongside the authorities) because now the independence of the report can be reasonably questioned.

 

Facts be damned.....a great deal of money will be changing hands. Think of it as automotive wealth redistribution.

I trust all of you have large umbrella insurance policies....

 

Pathetic. Greed instead of grief.

 

Ridiculous.. If every idiot who crashed a car out of their own ineptness and bad judgment won their lawsuits there would be no more cars..