Ford Will Pay $23 Million in Rollover Lawsuit

Rollovers • Cars that Pass National Rollover Standard May Still be Deadly • Feds Delay New Roof-Crush Rule til October • Report: NHTSA Seeks More Time for Roof-Crush Rule • Senators Seek Delay in New Roof Strength Safety Rules • Senators Question Roof Strength Safety Rules • Nader Protests Feds' Roof Crush Plan • Treacherous Treads Still Taking Lives • Ford Class Action Settlement Leaves Consumers in the Dust • Feds' Roof Crush Rule Inadequate, Critics Charge • New Study: Stronger SUV Roofs Save Lives • Ford Loses $82 Million Rollover Verdict Appeal • Feds Delay Roof Strength Rule Again • Ford Settles Explorer Rollover Lawsuits • Safety Crusaders Seek Action on Roof Crush Injuries • Roof Crush Summit Highlights Safety Shortcomings • Feds Ignore Roof Crush Conference • Feds Delay New Roof Strength Rule • GM to Offer Rollover Airbags, Ford to Strengthen Roofs • Safety Groups Want Earlier Stability Control Rule --- • More about Rollovers ...

February 5, 2004
Ford has agreed to pay $23.7 million to settle a long-simmering lawsuit filed by a family involved in a 1993 rollover accident.

The case involved the crash of a 1978 Bronco near Ceres, California. Three members of the Romo family were killed and three others were injured when the vehicle overturned several times, causing the roof to cave in.

The accident happened when driver Juan Romo swerved after he was cut off by another vehicle.

A California appeals court in November ordered Ford to pay $23.7 million to the Romo family after the U.S. Supreme Court threw out a $290 million judgment in the case.

A Stanislaus County jury originally awarded the family $4.6 million in compensatory damages and $290 million in punitive damages -- a judgment said to be the largest personal injury award ever upheld by an appeals court.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court eventually threw out the damages out and sent the case back to the state court after ruling in a different case that punitive damages must be reasonable and proportionate to the harm suffered.

Ford said it believes the award is "excessive and improper" but decided to pay in order to settle the 10-year-old case.

Back to the top |

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.    The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission.