Ga. Supreme Court Says Chrysler Must Pay $40M Jeep Judgment
The Georgia Supreme Court Thursday upheld the award for the family of 4-year-old Remi Walden, who died when the Jeep burst into flames after it was hit from behind.
March 15, 2018 at 05:07 PM
4 minute read
Fiat Chrysler has lost its bid to overturn a $40 million judgment in Georgia for the death of a 4-year-old boy in a burning Jeep.
The Georgia Supreme Court Thursday upheld the award for the family of 4-year-old Remi Walden, who died when the Jeep burst into flames after it was hit from behind. The Jeep's rear mounted gas tank was the target of his parents' lawsuit.
The case has been closely watched by business groups, who urged the high court to toss the award.
Justice Britt Grant wrote the opinion, parsing through the state's new evidence code. All the justices concurred with parts of the decision, but five of the nine differed on some points. Still, the end result is a 9-0 vote upholding Decatur County Superior Court Judge J. Kevin Chason's decision to slash the award to $40 million after a jury reached a $150 million verdict.
On the winning side is a legal team led by plaintiffs attorney James “Jim” Butler Jr. of Butler Wooten & Peak in Atlanta and Columbus. Butler tried the case with his son, James “Jeb” Butler III of Butler Tobin.
The Butler trial team also included: George Floyd of Bainbridge; Cathy Cox, now dean of the Mercer University law school; David Rohwedder of Butler Wooten; and Beth Glen, senior paralegal at Butler Wooten. Michael Terry and Frank Lowrey of Bondurant Mixson & Elmore worked with the Butlers on the appeal.
“Remi died by fire 6 years ago this month,” Butler said in an email Thursday just after the opinion was released. “Remi's parents and their legal team hope this is the end of it. We thank all the judges who devoted such time and effort to this case.”
Chrysler is now trying to figure out a way to get the U.S. Supreme Court to take a look. “FCA US is disappointed in this decision. We are considering our legal options,” a corporate spokesman said by email Thursday.
And the company pointed to its long-held contention that the cause of the child's death was the other driver and not the placement of the gas tank behind the axle—which was later changed to the middle of the Jeep.
“The company continues to extend sympathies to the family of Remi Walden for their loss,” Chrysler said. “This tragic crash was caused by a reckless pick-up truck driver who slammed into the rear of a 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee at highway speed.”
Following a nine-day trial in Bainbridge, the jury awarded the boy's parents $120 million for wrongful death and $30 million for the child's pain and suffering. The verdict apportioned 1 percent of the fault to the other driver and 99 percent to Chrysler. The company filed a motion for new trial, which Chason denied on the condition that the parents accept a lower wrongful death verdict of $30 million and a pain and suffering verdict of $10 million, which they did. Chrysler then appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals, but the state's intermediate appellate court upheld the trial court's judgment.
Now the Supreme Court has upheld Chason as well, although for different reasons covered in 33 pages of opinions.
Chrysler's lead appellate counsel on the case is Thomas Dupree Jr., a Washington, D.C.-based partner with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. Dupree hung his oral argument for granting Chrysler a new trial on the company's objection to his opponent bringing up CEO Sergio Marchionne's $68 million-a-year compensation. Dupree complained to the Supreme Court in oral arguments last October that Butler wrote the CEO's pay on a “giant” board in front of the jury.
In Thursday's opinion, Grant supported the trial judge, Chason, and the Court of Appeals. “We cannot say that the prejudicial effect of the evidence so far outweighed its probative value that its admission was clear and obvious reversible error,” Grant said. Rather, she said, judges must determine whether compensation evidence is admissible.
The case is Chrysler v. Walden, No. S17G0832.
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 AllFederal Judge Rejects Teams' Challenge to NASCAR's 'Anticompetitive Terms' in Agreement
Trial Begins for Man Accused of Killing Ga. Nursing Student Laken Riley
5 minute read'Rebound' In Demand For Legal Services Places Southeast Among Top 3 Regions In U.S.
4 minute readMaryland Atty Pushes Judge to Grant Discovery in Reverse Discrimination Suit Against King & Spalding
4 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