Not saying I disagree with you Deuuuce. I think everybody on this page would agree with you. The problem is, that we live in a day and age, where you can sue anybody, anytime, and for anything. With that being said, if you were to present this case to a Jury full of Mothers and Fathers and instill the least bit of doubt, that the car wasn't built sound enough, to handle over 600hp, go 0-60 in like 3 seconds, or go over 200mph, then you might have a case. Then, add to that, as I said above, the stories about the car being difficult to drive, and the amount of crashes vs the amount of cars made, then you might be able to convince people that the car was built to be faulty from the beginning. Normal people don't know what kind of driver Jay Leno is. Most would think that because he owns a gazillion amount of cars, some of which are high end sports cars with large amounts of horsepower, that he could be considered a professional race car driver when in reality, on most weekends, you can find him cruising around the area going the speed limit or well below, in something made 100 years ago. The CGT has a reputation of being "hard to drive". To you and me, that means one thing. But to non car people, that may mean something completely different. It's all about what you can convince a Judge or Jury, of what the facts are.

 

Good points. Perhaps the driver having racing experience could then work against the case. Time will tell.

 

At a minimum, this will settle liability/contributory/comparable negligence amongst the driver and whomever else is being potentially blamed (from the manufacturer to the folks who serviced the car to the folks who paved the road and put up the signs.....). Too many insurance companies I am sure involved- none of which want the full burden - its just business - the driver's insurer would look to reduce exposure and this will do it whether 1 or 10 or 20 percent.

 

CALI is a pure comparative fault state, so the % of fault attributed to the driver will offset any verdict...of course, CALI jurors love anyone in HOLLYWOOD and won't blame Walker much, if at all. Assuming Atty Mark Geragos can prove what he alleges: The lawsuit contends the right rear tire experienced a suspension anomaly that caused the wheel to steer to the left (causing the loss of control)...then there is a solid basis for the lawsuit. If I died in a similar crash, I would want my wife to hire the best damn lawyer she could find and the best experts...rather than take a Sheriff or Coroner investigation as the final word. That's just their opinion, aided by Porsche, who may or may not have looked at every detail. Why would Porsche conclude their car was unsafe, esp knowing a lawsuit was coming? Come on..that's a laugher.

Oh yea, and the McDonalds lawsuit...Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her to 83 pounds (38 kg). Two years of medical treatment followed. Documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000. McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices. He argued that all foods hotter than 130 °F (54 °C) constituted a burn hazard, and that restaurants had more pressing dangers to warn about. The jury awarded Liebeck $160,000 for her past medical expenses and the equivalent of two day's worth of profits from McD coffee. McD generates $1.35 million per day in coffee sales.

 

Well, as the saying goes. What goes around comes around. PCNA talked they way out of the faulty coolant lines with the NSTB. Now this lawsuit is in the public domain.

 

Faulty coolant lines?? I just cannot believe you think those are problems At least that's what everyone says when I bring up my coolant fitting pop out, all the while pointing to PCNA's statement...SMDH

 

I assume you guys know that PCNA already was sued about a death in that car. The death also had nothing to do with the car (based on extensive press coverage) but as I recall PCNA settled for a reported $4M. That was also in CA.

A jury is going to see a crying mother/daughter/wife (take your pick) and give them something... I'd bet PCNA will settle it.

 

I agree, esp. with something as high profile that would gain media traction quick. If it ever got to the point I think they'd settle. Although, and admittedly not knowing all the facts, I'd say the basis for a suit is unjust. I wonder how the fact that they weren't the original owners of the car plays into this as first owners received safety info from PCNA

 

It was Mr. Appleton's apparent indifference to her suffereing (he litterally bored the jury with inane statistical analysis) as judged by a jury of her peers (most were also retired and/or in her age group) that led to the award.

 

Thank you. People tend to spout off ignorant views about the legal system and the coffee case to try and prove a point jaded by ignorance or agenda.

I did not read your entire post so you may have said this, but the lawyer tried to settle for her medical bills pre suit. She was a passenger. They had pulled over. The top popped and she got third degree burns in a very sensitive area. McDs got poped because they had notice if problems and failed to take any remedial actions because their internal studies opined that they made XXX extra dollars per XXX period based on having hot coffee at this temperature. The judge remitted the verdict to a much lower amount than what the jury felt she deserved.

I am bit familiar with McDs protocol as I was one if the attorneys' in the Vector Marketing/McDs class action.

Stop with all of the precedent and this will cause x, y and z if they award drama. This is silly. Everything will be fine, Porsche never rolls over, and no one on here has to worry about their selfish liitle concerns about the precedent of this case or how they may be impacted.

I would think the suit ill advised, but I also know lawyer involved and I doubt he would file such a claim absent a somewhat reliable expert opinion. This entire event was tragedy so perhaps the focus should be on the real tragedy to the children impacted.

 

Are you speaking of BK and Rudle incident? If so, you just sound ignorant because PCNA paid 8% of that settle which was way less than nuisance or cost of defense value. If not about BK, then use more specific information.

 

end of the day its not porsche's fault, its the drivers fault in this case. however, i agree that porsche will settle just to be done with it

 

Based on what? Your first hand knowledge of how Porsche handles cases or your inside info of what experts found. In 20 years of practice I have primarily represented or defended large companies in product liability cases, but I have also won over $300 million in jury verdicts in 8 HRT bellwether cases and settled over to 200mil in defective drug, ERISA and product liability cases. I was also on steering committee of BP oil spill case and I defended a lot of of the CMO and credit swap litigation. I know how large companies reserve and litigate.

I can tell you without hesitation that Porsche will not roll over and settle unless there is some exposure or concern of exposure. They will fight to the end if they did nothing wrong.

 

Wow, nice Resume! I'm calling you the next time I get a speeding ticket. J/k




Of course they won't, and they shouldn't, as everybody here agrees, that they did nothing wrong. But would they rather risk every news channel and news paper running headlines daily, and over and over like "Widow of Professional driver of sports car carrying Hollywood star, Paul Walker, suing Porsche due to defective, difficult to drive car" or would they just rather put the issue to rest? Without the name "Paul Walker" being involved, no doubt, they would tell her to pound sand. We all know how the mainstream media can twist stories around to make a person, or Corporation look bad, and then add to that the name "Paul Walker" and I think that will be all the exposure they need to cave. This whole case will have nothing to do with pure facts, but everything to do with a name and the attention it will bring. Is Porsche willing to spend 5 million on attorney's fee's and risk their name being on every news channel for causing the death of a Star for a year? Or would they rather cut a 5 million dollar check and make the whole thing go away? I guess we will see.

 

Rodas, unfortunately as I consider him a friend, will be the alleged cause of the death of someone known and liked. Very, very difficult case even with solid expert proof. Geragos already has enough publicity and money so I am very curious why he took the case fir the Rodas side with a car that can potentially provide some telementary at the time of the accident.

5 million in fees??? Even at my rate that would be impossible for a car wreck case.