Practice Areas

Defective Tire Failure Litigation

It was not so long ago that a tire trial was an isolated event attracting little notoriety or interest outside the immediate participants. Spurred by increasingly large verdicts, that is no longer true. The prosecution of tire product liability claims has become well-coordinated by a highly organized plaintiffs’ bar. Using sophisticated information technology, these attorneys pursue coordinated discovery, rapidly sharing the benefits of their efforts. Unfortunately, tire manufacturers become “target” defendants, and at times, it seems as if the entire industry is vulnerable. At the same time, changing jury profiles and attitudes call into question the “tried and true” defenses and approaches to tire claims. Not surprisingly, tire manufacturers are looking for innovative approaches in this new era.

Moran Brown's representation of tire manufacturers has deep roots. Over twenty years ago, Ken Moran began trying cases as a member of the regional counsel team for Firestone during the Steel Belted Radial 500 (“SBR 500”) litigation. Over the years, our attorneys have represented Firestone, Uniroyal-Goodrich, Continental Tire North America, Goodyear, Dunlop and others, handling claims nationally, regionally, and in Virginia. Drawing on our 25 years of experience, we also have handled a number of special projects for tire companies, ranging from drafting responses to discovery to designing and implementing sophisticated extranets. MKB also is proud to have filed a number of amicus briefs for the tire industry. Two-thirds of our personnel are actively involved in our tire company representation.

Our experience and commitment to cost-effective, quality representation of our clients allows MKB to provide services on a par with law firms many times its size.

Overview of our 25 years of service to the tire industry

Product Liability Defense

Tire litigation frequently involves a specific product line, tire type or failure mode (e.g., “zipper failures”). Our lawyers have served as national or regional trial counsel for a number of tire manufacturers, defending claims involving specific tire lines or applications nationwide. This representation has resulted in several reported cases including: Ryan v. General Tire, Inc., 103 F.2d 145, 1996 WL 699727 (10th Cir. 1996); Staab v. Uniroyal Tire Co., 1994 WL 230634 (W.D. Mo. 1994); Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Eddings, 673 So.2d 131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996); Woelful v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 493 So.2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986; aff’d 503 So.2d 329 (Fla. 1987); and Baker v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 793 F.2d 1196 (11th Cir. 1986).

We also have served as Virginia counsel for several tire manufacturers. In this capacity we have defended a variety of products including tread/belt separation tire disablements, zipper failures, multi-piece rim, mounting cases, and so forth. MB attorneys have also represented the Virginia retail operations and outlets of these companies in premises liability and negligence matters.

Finally, MB is able to combine its tire and toxic tort expertise to assist its clients in their asbestos, silica, benzene, talc and other toxic tort matters.

Discovery Coordination.

As tire companies are faced with “mass tort” type litigation, a coordinated approach to responding to sweeping discovery becomes paramount. Building on our role as regional discovery counsel during the SBR 500 era, MB has assisted several tire manufacturers in this area. We draft responses to written discovery to insure consistency and accuracy; manage large document collections and have participated in large-scale document collection efforts; establish document repositories; and design and implement document management and other discovery-related computer systems. We also assist with motions to compel from drafting briefs in opposition to attending hearings on behalf of the manufacturer. To insure that these projects are handled efficiently, we rely on our staff of experienced legal assistants for document management and discovery drafting.

Trade Secret Protection.

Drawing on this experience, MB has developed a reputation for protecting trade secrets during the course of discovery. We have successfully resisted efforts to force disclosure of such trade secrets as:

• Compound formulas -- In re Continental General Tire, Inc., 979 S.W.2d 609 (Tex. 1998); In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 106 S.W.3d 730 (Tex. 2003)

• Plant inspections -- In re Continental Tire North America, Inc., 74 S.W.2d 884 (Tex. App. -Eastland, 2002); amicus brief for the Rubber Manufacturers Association in support of a Yokahama mandamus petition -- In re Yokahama Tire Corporation (Supreme Court of Texas, No. 02-0367)

• Quality manuals -- Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Eddings, 673 So.2d 131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

• Proprietary design materials

Special Projects.

MB’s industry-wide view also allows us to provide innovative approaches to the increasingly complex and coordinated world of tire litigation. Our trial experience, for example, has demonstrated the utility of trial (evidence) presentation systems. We have worked with a number of vendors throughout the country and different computer systems to effectively use computers in the courtroom. We also have developed a wide variety of demonstrative exhibits, ranging from storyboards to animations, for use at trial.

Similarly, MB’s grasp of tire technology and issues has helped us counter the myriad of plaintiffs’ experts in tire cases. We maintain up-to-date information on the expert’s “current” opinions, and coordinate with other law firms and tire companies to facilitate the sharing of expert information. In the same vein, we have worked with experts for the manufacturer, designing effective ways to explain complex subject matters such as wax migration, intracarcass pressurization, thermography, processing marks within tires, and so forth.

MB also has worked with outside vendors assisting with jury research. We have participated in focus groups throughout the country helping to understand local demographics and attitudes.

Commitment to Technology.

The practice of law today requires the use of technology to its fullest. MB insures that its attorneys, legal assistants and staff are equipped with the latest hardware and programs to meet our clients’ needs and demands.

But that is not the extent of our commitment. We recognize the importance of systems and efficiency, particularly in the area of litigation coordination. We have designed and installed a variety of document management and computerized libraries for our clients. We also have assisted tire companies with the design and installation of extranets, from WANS to internet-based, to better coordinate their litigation.

At MB, we pride ourselves on our ability to provide flexible, innovative solutions to our clients' problems and needs.

___________________________________

Related Articles About Defective Tire Litigation