- Ford is asking a judge to throw out a massive $2.5 billion verdict in a case about roof safety.
- The automaker claims that jurors knew about a previous judgment of $1.7 billion against it.
- What they might not have known was that Ford managed to get that case thrown out.
Automakers are notoriously protective of their image, especially when the stakes involve billions of dollars. Ford is no exception, and right now, they’re aggressively defending their reputation in a Georgia courtroom following a record-setting verdict handed down in February. The jury awarded the Mills family $2.5 billion, ruling that Ford was responsible for the deaths of two Super Duty truck owners.
The Fatal Incident
The deceased owners, Herman and Debra Mills, tragically lost their lives after the Ford F-250 they were in rolled over, causing the roof to collapse. The Mills family argues that Ford knew the roofs on Super Duty trucks—produced between 1999 and 2016—were structurally inadequate, yet they continued to sell them. The jury apparently agreed, as the verdict came in favor of the plaintiffs.
More: Ford Must Pay $2.5 Billion To Family Of Couple Killed In Rollover Crash
It awarded the plaintiffs, the Mills family, $2.5 billion and now Ford wants that judgment thrown out. It says that on the day of the verdict, one juror called Ford’s legal team to express concern. They said that they believed at least two people in the jury knew about a previous judgment of $1.7 billion against Ford in a very similar case.
The case in question, Hill v. Ford, involved a similar scenario, where the roof of a Ford vehicle collapsed during an accident, leading to a fatality. Despite a judge explicitly instructing the jury to avoid discussing the earlier case, they allegedly disregarded that order. During deliberations in the Mills case, a juror reportedly commented, “This could be a record breaker.”
According to court documents seen by Carcomplaints, the juror went further than just making a call, as they sent the following message to Ford’s legal counsel:
“The only thing I have follow up on from earlier would be; and I think the way the question was phrased was : Do I think there was any influence on this verdict because of what others knew and provided with the other jurors in response to the previous verdicts (ie: Hill case) and monetary amounts awarded: I will tell you now that my sworn testimony would be. Yes beyond a shadow of doubt there was an influence, based on what I heard and witnessed in that juror room.” (Text message from juror 36 to Ford’s attorney.)
Ford’s Argument
In light of this, Ford is arguing that the “poisonous influence of the Hill verdict likely explains why the jury found that alleged ‘roof crush’ injuries caused Plaintiffs’ deaths on a record that establishes just the opposite.”
The company further claims that, while tragic, the roof collapse wasn’t the primary cause of the Mills couple’s deaths. Ford is now seeking either a new trial or a reduction in damages to the constitutional maximum of $4,675,000.
