dictionary

Eric Fiegel: The Ford rollover trial

Nathan Maier lost control of the SUV on Interstate 30 in Dallas. The vehicle went into the median, veered back onto the highway and rolled over three to four times

Eric Fiegel is a CNN Producer in the CNN Dallas bureau.

Q: What was the plaintiff's case based on? What was the degree of difficulty in arguing this case?

FIEGEL: The plaintiff’s case was based on Nathan Maier who was returning from a fishing trip from Greenville, TX back to Dallas, TX. On the way back, a car veered into his lane and he made a maneuver to get out of the way of that car. When he made that maneuver, his car swerved into the median at a high speed and he could not control it. The car then rolled three to four times and was stopped in the median. Nathan Maier was killed in that accident. There were also three passengers with him in the car. One of the other passengers was killed as well and one passenger was thrown from the vehicle. That passenger was Allen Beene who was also one of the plaintiffs in this trial.

VIDEO CNN's John Zarrella reports on the verdict in the Ford SUV rollover case Play video (QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)    MESSAGE BOARD SUVs: monsters or misjudged?

LEGAL RESOURCES Latest Legal News Law Library FindLaw Consumer Center Select a topic Bankruptcy Discrimination Divorce Estate Planning Landlord-Tenant Personal Injury Taxes

The difficulty in this was the plaintiff had to prove that the Ford Explorer caused the accident and not Maier’s evasive maneuver. The plaintiff had to prove that Ford knew all along that their product was defective but they produced it anyway for monetary reasons. That was a very difficult thing for them to prove to the jury. And, obviously, the jury disagreed with the plaintiffs and went with Ford in this decision.

Q: What was Ford's main defense? What swayed the jury to their side?

FIEGEL: Ford’s main defense was the fact that while performing this maneuver, any other SUV would have performed the same way. The car swerved and hit the median. At that point, something happened that they call "rim gouging," when the rims of the tire become exposed and they dig into asphalt. The vehicle was traveling at a high speed and the tires were also digging into gravel in the median. This causes a slow down of the tires, but the truck is still moving at the same speed, out of control. Therefore, there is such a force on the vehicle that it causes the vehicle to trip and the trip is actually the beginning of the role.

Ford all along said that the Explorer was a safe vehicle and it has always been a safe vehicle. They said that it was just an accident and the Explorer did all it could do under these circumstances.

Q: Is there a history of rollovers with the Explorer? If so, has Ford corrected this problem?

FIEGEL: This is a pretty controversial subject. The history of many of the rollovers that have come into the media spotlight over the past couple of years have been associated with the Firestone tires. But that was tread separation when a vehicle was traveling down a perfectly straight dry pavement road. The tire separated, which caused the vehicles to roll. Ford will tell you that there is no history of rollover with this vehicle and that it fits within the statistics of all other SUVs in its class. They say it is no more dangerous to drive and no less dangerous. Cars do rollover. There is no such thing as a totally safe vehicle. No SUV is immune from a rollover once it goes off the road.

So, there is a history of rollover with the Explorer, but it has mostly been associated with the Firestone tires. This trial had nothing to do with Firestone tires. It strictly involved a Ford Explorer rolling.

But now, of course, Ford has come out with the 2002 Explorer, which they claim is the safest SUV on the market. It has new technology that sends computer signals when it senses a rollover that helps balance the vehicle. It also has what are called "side curtains" which are like airbags when a rollover is sensed. They are touting it as the safest SUV out there, but they are not saying that any vehicles before that were unsafe, just that now it’s the safest model available

Q: Any final thoughts?

FIEGEL: This was a difficult trial for the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s main case is that Ford knowingly produced a defective vehicle; that when the Explorer was released in 1989, that Ford knew it had stability problems. Engineers at Ford suggested improvements in 1989, two of which were lowering and widening the vehicle. Ford decided to only do two of those four; they did not widen or lower the vehicle. Ford does not concede that the Explorer had stability problems. They felt that there was no reason to lower or widen the vehicle. The plaintiff's claim was that Ford did not make the modifications for monetary reasons but to meet production needs and get the Explorer on the market before GM released their models.

The part that, I think, the jury had a hard time grasping, that only two inches here and one inch there would have made a difference in this accident. That is where the jury I think had trouble ruling in the plaintiff’s favor. It was a 1995 Explorer that Nathan Maier crashed and I don’t think the jury ever felt that those slight changes would have made a difference in this particular accident.

Now, the interesting part is that the 2002 Explorer is lower and wider. They have finally made the vehicle lower and wider, but they are saying that it is for room reasons; it gives a roomier vehicle and their engine is different and needed to sit lower. So their reasons for a wider, lower vehicle do not fit in with the plaintiff's ideas.

Ford defends itself in Explorer rollover trial
March 13, 2001
Ford, Bridgestone/Firestone settle rollover lawsuit
January 8, 2001
Government investigators seek to wrap up Firestone probe
December 21, 2000
Bridgestone/Firestone says it found answers in its dig for tire failure causes
December 20, 2000
Firestone CEO, former workers answer questions in tire lawsuits
October 27, 2000
House passes safety bill in wake of Firestone tire recalls
October 11, 2000

Bridgestone/Firestone
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Consumers Union

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window

External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.