Takata Deal Better Than Nothing, Say Lawyers for Air-Bag Plaintiffs
That's how plaintiffs lawyers characterized a settlement reached this week in the Takata bankruptcy that could provide up to $130 million in compensation to victims of exploding air bags.
February 15, 2018 at 03:19 PM
5 minute read
It's better than nothing.
That's how plaintiffs lawyers characterized a settlement reached this week in the Takata bankruptcy that could provide up to $130 million in compensation to victims of exploding air bags. Plaintiffs lawyers praised the deal as a means to pursue damages against Takata, whose insolvency has long raised doubts about the likelihood of compensation for those claiming injuries or deaths. And, in all cases except Honda, plaintiffs could still sue the automakers in court under the settlement.
“Obviously, all of our clients—and I think they're in excess of 40—are very frustrated with how the Takata bankruptcy has impinged on their recovery and their rights. But having said that, they're very pleased that they're getting something,” said Kevin Dean of Motley Rice, who represented the plaintiffs in the bankruptcy. “Before this bankruptcy started, they were getting zero. And now, they're getting some compensation, and so they feel some relief.”
More than 42 million vehicles have been recalled over Takata air bags, the largest automotive recall in U.S. history, for exploding unintentionally, in some cases unleashing metal shrapnel into cars. More than 20 people have died, and hundreds more injured from the air bags. In June, Takata's North American unit, TK Holdings Inc., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Delaware.
A committee representing air-bag victims had opposed Takata's reorganization plan. But on Feb. 10, lawyers representing the victims in the bankruptcy reached a deal in which 13 automakers agreed to drop some of their creditor claims against Takata in order to set up a trust that would compensate those claiming injuries or deaths. Plaintiffs lawyers predicted the trust could be between $80 million and $130 million.
Those suing for personal injuries or wrongful deaths have had limited options in pursuing damages, particularly against Takata, whose nearly $1.6 billion sale to Key Safety Systems, a subsidiary of China's auto parts supplier Ningbo Joyson Electronic Corp., excludes air-bag liabilities.
“It gives victims the security they'll need to be able to recover some money from Takata,” said Curtis Miner, a partner at Colson Hicks Eidson in Coral Gables, Florida, who is head of the personal injury and wrongful death cases in multidistrict litigation over Takata air bags. “And they can still pursue their claims and have their day in court.”
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Brendan Shannon has scheduled a hearing on Friday to confirm Takata's amended Chapter 11 exit plan.
But the settlement is far from perfect. For one thing, the amount in the trust isn't certain.
“It's not like they're contributing hard dollars from their own checking accounts,” Miner said. “In the bankruptcy, the automakers have claims, substantial claims, like any other creditor. They're contributing a large percentage of their claims.”
A lot depends on what remains available to distribute, and insurance companies are involved. Miner said he expected some of those details to be ironed out within 60 days.
The settlement does not prevent plaintiffs from making claims while continuing to pursue lawsuits against the automakers, except for Honda Motor Co., which carved out a “channeling injunction” that set up a claims process but barred claimants from also seeking damages in court.
“What that means is if I'm a Honda driver in the future and get in an accident, I can't sue Honda in court to start because I'm channeled into this procedure,” he said. “Once the trustee has made his final determination, Honda is obligated to pay the full amount. This money does not come out of the trust fund. It comes out of Honda's pockets.”
But Honda, which was the automaker with the most air-bag lawsuits, has settled most of its cases. More than 50 lawsuits remain against Toyota, BMW, General Motors, Subaru, Nissan, Mazda, Ford and others.
“The bulk of the cases currently filed in court are against other automakers,” Miner said, “and the channeling injunction will have no impact on those cases.”
But that could change. Six automakers, including Honda, Toyota and Nissan, already have paid a total of more than $1.2 billion to settle class actions brought by consumers over economic losses. For the automakers, the settlement could be an experiment, with Honda as the “stalking horse,” said Peter Henning of Wayne State University Law School.
“Their hope is if this works out for Honda, other manufacturers will opt in because this is a much more expeditious process than litigating,” he said. “They've got a lot of claims, but they're unsecured creditors just like the tort plaintiffs are in regard to Takata. For their air-bag cost claims, they may get very little themselves, but the tort claims continue.”
Any money from the Takata bankruptcy trust also could be used as offsets against any judgments, settlements or verdicts, he said.
In the meantime, victims also have a third resource: A $125 million victim fund set up as part of a $1 billion criminal plea deal that Takata Corp., the parent corporation based in Japan, reached with the U.S. Department of Justice last year. But according to court papers filed in January in the criminal case by special master Eric Green, the value of injury claims against Takata “massively exceeds” the amount of the fund. He predicted claims could total between $710 million and $1.5 billion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Health Care Behemoth'?: DOJ Seeks Injunction Blocking $3.3B UnitedHealth Merger Proposal
3 minute readNLRB Bans 'Captive Audience' Meetings, Yanking Away Platform Employers Used to Combat Unionizing
Freshfields Hires DOJ Official, Squire Taps Paul Hastings Atty for US Antitrust Head
3 minute readHow Big Law Congressional Investigation Practices Will Stay Busy in 2025
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250