Verduzco v. Ford Motor Co. CA5
Plaintiff and appellant Irvin Verduzco appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County entered on April 20, 2015, in favor of defendant and respondent Ford Motor Company (Ford).
Verduzco sustained a skull fracture and brain trauma, inter alia, in an automobile collision. He sued Ford, alleging a defect in the design of the 1993 Ford Taurus—the car in which he was riding at the time of the accident—caused his head injuries. In a special verdict, the jury concluded the Taurus’s design was not “a substantial factor in causing harm . . . .”
On appeal, Verduzco makes several contentions. First, substantial evidence did not support the special verdict. Second, the trial court erroneously denied a motion to compel Ford to produce tests relied upon by its experts to demonstrate how the Taurus’s design balanced crash energy absorption and intrusion resistance. Third, the court erroneously refused to give his two requested special instructions on causa
Comments on Verduzco v. Ford Motor Co. CA5