WHAT WAS THE DEFENSE THINKING?
You have to wonder what the defense was thinking in this rollover case? It is one thing to posture during settlement negotiations with the other side and put your best foot forward, arguing you are going to win the case. It is another thing, though, when there is testimony that a jury hears, that is the complete opposite of your theory of the case. A police officer and a nurse – those are two pretty credible professionals.
Again, I have to wonder why, at some point, before the jury went out for its deliberations, there wasn’t an attempt made by the defense to try to settle this case? How could they be that confident they were going to win??
Apparently, the defense was sure that its experts would be believed by the jury and contradict the evidence stated above, that they thought they could roll the dice.Remember “I Love Lucy”? Lucy, you got some plaining to do!!
Finally, I think this points out the value of jury verdicts. Nothing gets the attention of corporations and industries, like the automotive industry, more than a huge jury verdict in a design defect or seat belt defect case. It helps to insure that the industries will do everything possible to produce the very safest product possible for the public, including properly designed seat belts.
What do you think about this verdict? Come on, I want to hear from you.