Tennessee Personal Injury Lawsuit
People in Tennesse as well as other parts of the United States use a wide range of consumer products to get through in their day-to-day lives. We expect these products to provide us with the quality od service that we have come to expect from them. However, there are times when these products turn out to be defective and in some instances may result in personal injuries from using them. If you have come across a similar situation where you or someone you knew suffered an injury from consuming a defective product, then you should speak to a Tennessee Personal Injury Lawyer straightaway. They will provide you with the correct course of action and see to it that you get the deserved compensation that you are entitled to for the injuries you have suffered.
In this particular case, Mr. Ernesto Torres was driving his Ford F-350 Econoline on August 16, 2004, when the van flipped over. The cause of the accident was the blowing of a Goodyear Load Range Eleft rear tire after a tread separation. In the event Andrew Torres, Hervetina Bahena and Frank Enriquez, three passengers in the van, were killed and Joseph Enriquez suffered from severe brain injuries. Six other passengers were also injured.
The injured parties and families of the crash victims claimed that the tire and the van were both designed defectively. They maintained that the van was manufactured with a tire that was quite prone to tread separation. Several similar incidents had been reported earlier. The Ford Motor Company settled before the trial and the amount was not disclosed. Goodyear, however, wanted to argue in 2007 that the tire failure was due to a significant road hazard damage that had taken place before the accident.
However, the judge in this trial ruled without holding a full evidentiary hearing, struck down Goodyear's liability issue and allowed the defendants to contest damages only. The jury awarded $14 million in damages to Joseph Enriquez, and a total of $14 million to the other three families of the crash victims.
In July 2010, the state Supreme Court upheld this decision and stated: when a sanction is "non-case concluding," an evidentiary hearing is not mandatory." Goodyear, now supported by several associations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce then sought a rehearing. In its most recent ruling the state high court, however denied the petition but addressed the issues to justify its 2010 decision. The court stated that, "A January 2007 hearing attended by counsel for both sides was sufficient for the trial judge to ask questions on the discovery dispute without the necessity of cross-examination."
"Although Goodyear requested an evidentiary hearing, it did not make an offer of proof to the district court as to what evidence should be considered in addition to the representations of counsel," the Supreme Court ruled.
Cases like these are found occuring pretty frequently. We hope our products to work like they should and we depend on them to meet our requiremnts, but when they result in a personal injury, many of us are left having to deal with the pain and suffering caused by them. If you or someone you know has been injured due to a such a defective product or device, we recommend that you contact one of our caring and knowledgeable Tennessee Personal Injury attorneys immediately. We will work with you to make sure you get the compensation that is rightfully yours and try and get you the maximum bnefits in return for the issues you have been through.
In this particular case, Mr. Ernesto Torres was driving his Ford F-350 Econoline on August 16, 2004, when the van flipped over. The cause of the accident was the blowing of a Goodyear Load Range Eleft rear tire after a tread separation. In the event Andrew Torres, Hervetina Bahena and Frank Enriquez, three passengers in the van, were killed and Joseph Enriquez suffered from severe brain injuries. Six other passengers were also injured.
The injured parties and families of the crash victims claimed that the tire and the van were both designed defectively. They maintained that the van was manufactured with a tire that was quite prone to tread separation. Several similar incidents had been reported earlier. The Ford Motor Company settled before the trial and the amount was not disclosed. Goodyear, however, wanted to argue in 2007 that the tire failure was due to a significant road hazard damage that had taken place before the accident.
However, the judge in this trial ruled without holding a full evidentiary hearing, struck down Goodyear's liability issue and allowed the defendants to contest damages only. The jury awarded $14 million in damages to Joseph Enriquez, and a total of $14 million to the other three families of the crash victims.
In July 2010, the state Supreme Court upheld this decision and stated: when a sanction is "non-case concluding," an evidentiary hearing is not mandatory." Goodyear, now supported by several associations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce then sought a rehearing. In its most recent ruling the state high court, however denied the petition but addressed the issues to justify its 2010 decision. The court stated that, "A January 2007 hearing attended by counsel for both sides was sufficient for the trial judge to ask questions on the discovery dispute without the necessity of cross-examination."
"Although Goodyear requested an evidentiary hearing, it did not make an offer of proof to the district court as to what evidence should be considered in addition to the representations of counsel," the Supreme Court ruled.
Cases like these are found occuring pretty frequently. We hope our products to work like they should and we depend on them to meet our requiremnts, but when they result in a personal injury, many of us are left having to deal with the pain and suffering caused by them. If you or someone you know has been injured due to a such a defective product or device, we recommend that you contact one of our caring and knowledgeable Tennessee Personal Injury attorneys immediately. We will work with you to make sure you get the compensation that is rightfully yours and try and get you the maximum bnefits in return for the issues you have been through.
Source...