Our Blog

Ford putting profits over people??

December 2, 2009

As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, The United Supreme Court found evidence that Ford Motor Company was well aware that their Explorer models were not only prone to rollovers but that the vehicles also had a weak roof – yet they chose to ignore this problem.

What deeply disturbs this author is that the cost to Ford would have been $20.00 per vehicle to make the roof stronger. Instead of making these low-cost modifications, Ford put the vehicle on the market.

Now, instead of paying $20.00 per vehicle to make the SUV safe for all, Ford will be paying $55 million dollars to a San Diego woman in punitive damages after she was rendered a paraplegic when her Explorer rolled and the roof crumpled in on her.

I find this example of putting profits over people absolutely disgusting. A mere $20.00 modification could have prevented this tragedy.

Request Your Free Consultation

Get the answers and support you need. Our friendly and experienced Buffalo personal injury lawyers will take the time to understand your case, explain your options, and guide you every step of the way.

Our Practice Areas

Read More Articles

Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Safety Group Seeks Recall of Five Million Jeeps

The Center for Auto Safety is asking Chrysler Group and Fiat to recall about five million vehicles. The safety group also been urging a recall of 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokees since 2009, stating the vehicles have two problems that involving fire hazards when the vehicle is rear-ended. The

Read Blog
Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Talk Texting With Your Loved Ones

Besides being a personal injury attorney, I am a runner. I run all over Buffalo and Western New York. What amazes me is the number of people I see texting or talking while driving. I see them jolted into awareness, taking quick action when they bring their eyes

Read Blog
Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Fourth Department Holds No Video Allowed For “NPE”

In Flores v. Vescera, (4th Dept. April 2013) the plaintiff appealed from a protective order that denied her demand to videotape a neuropsychological evaluation (NPE). The Curt held that there is no express statutory authority to videotape medical examinations and that videotaping has not been allowed in the

Read Blog