Case Study - Sumerel V. Goodyear Tire

CASE STUDY (WEEK 4)

Sumerel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

The parties Sumerel is the plaintiff and Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company is the defendant

History of the case Goodyear designed and manufactured a defective hose that was installed in their cars heating systems. After the trial the jury awarded them $1.3 million for the repair and replacement of their heating systems. Additionally, they received 36% and 48% for other costs and losses. Goodyear made a clerical error and the settlement was agreed to 100%. Goodyear appealed and won.

Facts Goodyear was found liable for defective manufactured hoses. Sumerel and the other plaintiffs won the case and were awarded by the jury for $1.3 million in damages and other costs and losses. The trial court declined to award pre-judgment interest and this is what led to the negotiation between both parties. Goodyear’s co-counsel assessed their liability at 100% opposed to the 36% and 48%. Sumerel and other plaintiff’s accepted the offer. Goodyear noticed their error and attempted to correct the miscalculation, but the plaintiff’s wanted the agreed settlement at 100%. The trial court granted the plaintiffs motion and Goodyear appealed and won.

The plaintiff’s theory Sumerel wanted the agreed settlement of 100%.

The defendant’s issue Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company made a mistake and claimed they shouldn’t have to pay the plaintiffs the full 100%.

Legal Issue Should Goodyear be held liable and pay the agreed settlement amount of 100%?

Holding of the court The judgment from the Colorado Court of Appeals were reversed. The case was remanded for the sole purpose of allowing the parties to file a satisfaction for the amounts already paid by Goodyear.

I agree with the final verdict from the Colorado Court of Appeals, Division VII. Goodyear made a mistake and I believe the Sumerel’s knew that and tried to take advantage of that.