Class Action Against Firestone In Non-Injury Cases - Overturned

CHICAGO AP reports that a federal appeals court has rejected a lower court`s decision granting class-action status to non-injury lawsuits filed against Bridgestone-Firestone and Ford over faulty tires .

The plaintiffs affected by Thursday`s ruling are seeking to recoup financial losses for their cars and tires . The cases do not include those in which people experienced tire blowouts or vehicle rollovers.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a single class-action lawsuit would be too complicated because there are would-be plaintiffs in all 50 states. The court said each case should be resolved under the laws in the states where the plaintiffs bo ught their vehicles and tires .

``Because these claims must be adjudicated under the law of so many jurisdictions, a single nationwide class is not manageable,`` the ruling by the three-judge panel said. The court also said that, because of a variety of circumstances from case to case, a class-action lawsuit was not feasible on a statewide level either.

The ruling could affect millions of Americans who once owned or still own 1991 to 2001 Ford Explorers or certain brands of Firestone`s truck tires . All would have been party to the lawsuit if the court had upheld the earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker.

The claims affected by the ruling are separate from hundreds of wrongful death and personal-injury lawsuits against Ford and Firestone.

Over the past two years, Firestone has recalled about 10 million tires amid the lawsuits and government investigations of allegations that failure of the tires led to crashes across the country.

The plaintiffs affected by the ruling are alleging a financial rather than physical injury from their ownership of the products.

John Beisner, a Washington-based attorney for Ford Motor Co., said Thursday`s ruling was correct because it would have been unfair for all owners of a product to benefit from an out-of-court settlement or a jury award, regardless of whether they suffered any harm or injury.

``Those sorts of claims really just create a windfall for people who have not had any sort of problem with the product,`` Beisner said.

Bridgestone-Firestone said the court validated its opinion from the start: that the cases were too varied to justify class-action status.

``It would make the legal process less efficient and less manageable, exactly the opposite of what a class action is intended to achieve,`` the company said in a prepared statement.

Another of the arguments made by plaintiffs and supported by Barker`s earlier ruling was that consolidation of the cases is more efficient than having hundreds of separate cases clogging court dockets across America. The appeals court rejected that argument as well.

``We thought that Judge Barker`s opinion was well reasoned and extensive,`` said Indianapolis-based plaintiff`s attorney Irwin Levin. ``We`re disappointed that the court of appeals did not give greater consideration to the pressing issues that were before it. We`re now assessing the options.``