I suppose this is also a frivolous lawsuit
The Idaho Statesman tells the story of an 82 year old veteran with Alzheimers that was grossly taken advantage of by Lithia Ford, a Fortune 1000 company. From the article:
"A lawsuit filed Monday alleges Lithia Ford of Boise violated an Idaho law that protects consumers from "unconscionable contracts" by taking advantage of an 82-year-old man's dementia.
The lawsuit contends a Lithia salesman convinced Frank Baxter to swap his $32,000 SUV for a $15,000 economy car on Sept. 9 by taking advantage of Baxter's "inability to understand, and other factors due to his age and dementia.The lawsuit claims the Lithia Ford contract with Baxter also was unconscionable because the dealership knew it was getting a vehicle that had been driven only 16 miles by Baxter and had a value of $31,253, in exchange for a 2006 Ford Focus valued at $15,215...
The suit also alleges that the dealership should have realized Baxter was not capable of entering into such an agreement because he was so disoriented at the time that a Lithia Ford employee had to drive him home."
I wonder what kind of commission you get when you make $15k on a trade-in by taking advantage of a war veteran who lives in the Alzheimer's ward of a nursing home. I hope for Boise's sake that they don't give the man his money back or Tiger and the rest of the heartless bastards might declare a state of emergency in Idaho and label Boise a Judicial Hellhole.
Do you know what a "Fortune 1000 company" is? How is Lithia Ford, a tiny auto dealership in Idaho, a Fortune 1000 company? It's not on the Fortune 1000 list.
Can you identify a single tort reformer who has proposed preventing this sort of lawsuit? Is your case against tort reform so weak that you have to rely on this sort of straw man to make your case? Why not address the actual arguments tort reformers make instead of arguing against fictional ones? http://overlawyered.com and http://pointoflaw.com post several legitimate arguments every week, and you never address those.
Posted by: Ted | January 30, 2006 at 11:41 AM
Where would I have come up with the crazy idea that Lithia Ford is a Fortune 1000 company?
For starters, the original article in The Idaho Statesman about the case. http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051213/NEWS02/512130337/1001/NEWS
"Medford, Ore.-based Lithia Ford Inc. is a Fortune 1000 company with 94 dealerships in 12 Western states and $2.7 billion in sales last year."
Are you contending that The Idaho Statesman had it wrong and Lithia isn't in the Fortune 1000?
If so, you might want to actually check your facts, first. Lithia Motors, Inc., the company that owns and operates Lithia
Ford is #600 on the Fortune 1000 in 2005 - down four spots from #596 in 2004. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/snapshots/795.html
Ted, I never claimed that tort reformers are trying to prevent these sorts of lawsuits. (Although they would like to eliminate punitive damages that would act as a deterrent to companies such as Lithia.)
Instead, I posted this article simply to show two things:
1: From time to time, very large corporations will behave in a very unethical manner; and
2: In those cases, the justice system is often the only way for a victim to find redress.
Are my arguments against tort reform so strong that you have to create your own straw men to knock down?
Thanks for the invite to Overlawyered and Point of Law... I'll head over and join the fun there soon.
Posted by: Justinian | January 31, 2006 at 09:37 AM