Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 35,900 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]
Branham v. Ford Motor Co. | 390 S.C. 203, 701 S.E.2d 5 (2010)
In Branham versus Ford Motor Company, the South Carolina Supreme Court answered whether the risk-utility test was the exclusive test for products-liability design-defect claims in the state.
In the nineteen eighties, sport utility vehicles were designed with either twin I-beam or MacPherson suspensions. Ford designed its Bronco Two with a twin I-beam suspension. The decision to use the twin I-beam suspension rather than the MacPherson suspension in the Bronco Two raised some stability concerns, but Ford made this choice due to major marketing advantages.
In two thousand one, Cheryl Hale was driving a Bronco Two with multiple minor passengers, including twelve-year-old Jesse Branham the third. No one in the car was wearing a seatbelt. At one point, Hale took her eyes off the road to tell the children in the backseat to be quiet. While Hale wasn’t looking at the road, the car veered onto the right shoulder. Hale attempted to get back onto the road, however, Hale overcorrected, and the car rolled over. Jesse was ejected from the car and suffered brain injuries.
Jesse Branham Junior, as guardian ad litem for his son, sued Hale for negligence and brought products-liability claims against Ford. Among other claims, Branham alleged that the Bronco Two had a handling and stability design defect that caused the vehicle to roll over. At trial, Branham showed that the Bronco Two would’ve had a lower center of gravity and likely wouldn’t have been prone to rollovers if Ford had used the MacPherson suspension. Branham also showed that this alternative design wouldn’t have increased costs. The trial court jury held that Ford and Hale were negligent and awarded Branham sixteen million dollars of actual damages and fifteen million dollars of punitive damages. Ford argued that Branham failed to prove that the MacPherson suspension was a reasonable alternative design. Ford appealed to the South Carolina Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
