Auto Safety Group Wants Records Unsealed in Case Over Goodyear Tires
The Center for Auto Safety is looking to shed light on whether there's a defect, and whether Goodyear was aware of it.
December 06, 2017 at 07:01 PM
5 minute read
Shutterstock
An automotive public safety group has moved to unseal records in a fraud lawsuit that could reveal how Goodyear and its lawyers allegedly sought to cover up a major safety defect through confidential legal settlements.
The Center for Auto Safety in Washington, D.C., which made a similar move to unseal records involving Chrysler vehicles, was granted a motion to intervene in a lawsuit against Goodyear and its lawyers. The lawsuit, which was filed in 2013 but has since settled, alleged Goodyear and its lawyers failed to disclose test data that would have revealed how its G159 tires, used primarily in motorhomes, suffered tread separation at high temperatures. The suit goes on to say that Goodyear and its lawyers secretly settled cases brought over the defect.
“These tires are still on the road today,” said Jennifer Bennett, a staff attorney at Public Justice who represents the Center for Auto Safety. The documents, she said, “would shed light on whether there's this defect. Second, they will shed light on how Goodyear handled the defect. Was Goodyear aware of it? The allegation is that Goodyear was aware of the defect and conspired with its lawyers.”
Among the documents the Center for Auto Safety hoped to obtain are test data, internal communications, including with Goodyear's lawyers, and claims from customers about property damage, injuries and deaths, Bennett said.
The case, in Maricopa County Superior Court, is the second filed against Goodyear on behalf of four members of the Haeger family, who were severely injured when their 38-foot motorhome veered off a New Mexico highway after the right front tire's tread separated. In the first case, which settled in 2010, U.S. Chief Judge Roslyn Silver in Arizona imposed $2.7 million in sanctions against Goodyear and its lawyers for failing to disclose test data to Heager's attorney—conduct that rose “to a truly egregious level.”
That order went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in April reversed to recalculate the sanctions, which it found must be causally linked to the underlying misconduct.
In the second case, brought in 2013, the Haegers sought punitive damages against The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and its former associate general counsel, Deborah Okey. The suit also named Goodyear's outside law firms: Fennemore Craig, and one of its lawyers, Graeme Hancock, and Ohio's Roetzel & Andress, and a former shareholder, Basil Musnuff.
Goodyear spokesman James Peate declined to comment. Goodyear is represented in the litigation by Squire Patton Boggs, Lewis Roca Rothgerberg Christie, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur and DLA Piper. In court papers, Goodyear's lawyers called the breadth of the Center for Auto Safety's unsealing request “startling” because it includes thousands of pages of trade secrets. They also took aim at the group's motives.
“Given CAS's relationship with the plaintiffs' bar (and the fees generated from that relationship), its interests in this matter can hardly be deemed neutral or objective, and they thus are entitled to little or no weight,” they wrote.
David Kurtz of The Kurtz Law Firm in Scottsdale, Arizona, called the defect “more than 20 times worse than Firestone tires.”
He said 41 lawsuits have been brought over the defect. He filed the original product liability suit on behalf of the Heagers in 2003. It settled for a confidential sum.
But in 2012, Silver found Goodyear and its lawyers had refused to produce information relevant to the case. “The little voice in every attorney's conscience that murmurs turn over all material information was ignored,” she wrote.
The second suit sought damages relating to that conduct.
“By fraud and deception, Goodyear was able to secretly settle cases for a small fraction of the just compensation victims were entitled to and would have received if the truth were disclosed,” the suit says.
After discovery commenced in 2016, new evidence about the deaths and injuries tied to the defect “came pouring out that showed this to be the worst tire ever made,” Kurtz said.
He said Goodyear has used protective orders to shield lawyers from obtaining documents in other cases.
“The protective orders have always prohibited disclosure to the federal government: To NHTSA, the Department of Justice, to anybody,” he said.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah allowed Kurtz to disclose some of the documents to the U.S. National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, which he did in July. Kurtz said he also requested referrals to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution.
But he supported the Center for Auto Safety's efforts to make the documents public.
“Only the Center for Auto Safety can follow up with NHTSA and congressional entities regarding the public safety side,” he said.
And while NHTSA's investigations are long, having the information be public would get drivers to act more quickly, Bennett said. NHTSA, now under the Trump Administration, also is bouncing back from widespread criticism over its failure to identify public safety defects such as those in General Motors ignition switches.
Still, Bennett said she was hopeful that NHTSA would act.
“I'm really hopeful that NHTSA will take this information and investigate and if Goodyear did not comply with its reporting responsibilities, but it's hard to know what's going to happen,” Bennett said.
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 AllChicago Federal Court Offers Banks Relief From Illinois' Historic Credit Fee Curbs
4 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
$25M Grubhub Settlement Sheds Light on How Other Gig Economy Firms Can Avoid Regulatory Trouble
8 minute readTrending Stories
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