Ford Motor State Court Decisions

Burcham v. Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC

Filed: June 23, 2017

State: Illinois
Court: Illinois Southern District Court
Case Number: 3:2016cv00943

ORDER granting 9 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 6/22/2017. (kmb2)

Eveler, et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: June 14, 2017

State: Louisiana
Court: Louisiana Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv14776

ORDER AND REASONS denying without prejudice 38 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Any Reference to or Evidence, Testimony or Argument Concerning Other Accidents, Incidents, Claims, Complaints and/or Lawsuits; FURTHER ORDERED that no later than 6/20/2017, plaintiffs file into the record a list setting out (1) all accidents and incidents that they claim are "substantially similar" to the accident at issue, (2) plaintiffs' contentionson an incident-by-incident basis, and suppor ted…

Eveler, et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: June 14, 2017

State: Louisiana
Court: Louisiana Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv14776

ORDER AND REASONS granting in part and denying without prejudice in part, as stated herein, 36 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Any Reference to or Evidence, Testimony or Argument Concerning the Design and Development History of the Bronco II, The First Generation UN46 Explorer. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk on 6/13/2017.(blg)

Eveler, et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: June 14, 2017

State: Louisiana
Court: Louisiana Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv14776

ORDER AND REASONS denying without prejudice 37 MOTION in Limine to to Exclude Any Reference to or Evidence, Testimony or Argument Interpreting the State of Mind of Intentions of Ford Engineers and Executives Based on Ford Engineering Documents or Internal Memoranda. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk on 6/14/2017.(blg)

Eveler, et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: June 14, 2017

State: Louisiana
Court: Louisiana Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv14776

ORDER AND REASONS denying 32 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Expert Opinions of Paul Semones. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk on 6/13/2017.(blg)

Wotring Towing v. Ford Motor Co. et al

Filed: May 31, 2017

State: Ohio
Court: Ohio Southern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv01193

OPINION AND ORDER granting 8 Defendant Cummins's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Plaintiff's claims against Cummins are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 05/31/2017. (dh1)

FORD MOTOR COMPANY v. USA

Filed: May 30, 2017

State: Federal Claims
Court: US Court of Federal Claims
Case Number: 1:2014cv00458

REPORTED OPINION denying 35 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 38 Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accord with this disposition. No costs. Signed by Judge Charles F. Lettow. (MZ)

ALINE MILLER V. FORD MOTOR CO.

Filed: May 26, 2017

State: United States
Court: US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 14-36001

Certification to Oregon Supreme Court. The panel certified the following question of state law to the Oregon Supreme Court: Oregon’s statute of repose for products liability actions (Or. Rev. Stat. § 30.905(2)) provides that a civil action “must be commenced before the later of . . . ten years . . . or . . . the expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state in which the product was manufactured . . . .” If the state of manufacture…

Arabian Motors Group W.L.L. v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 22, 2017

State: Michigan
Court: Michigan Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2016cv13655

OPINION AND ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 26 Motion for a Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Schoepf et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 22, 2017

State: Utah
Court: Utah District Court
Case Number: 2:2012cv00731

MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER finding as moot 80 Motion to Exclude Opinions of Jeff Morrill; finding as moot 81 Motion to Exclude Opinions of Tad Norris; granting 86 Renewed Motion to Dismiss for Spoliation Sanctions. Signed by Judge Dee Benson on 5/22/2017. (blh)

Jennifer Strang v. Ford Motor Co.

Filed: May 19, 2017

State: United States
Court: US Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Case Number: 16-2090

Patton v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 18, 2017

State: New York
Court: New York Western District Court
Case Number: 1:2014cv00308

DECISION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated in the attached Decision and Order, the Court adopts the portions of the Report and Recommendation 42 to which neither party objects. The Court sustains the Defendants objections and declines to adopt thos e portions of the Report and Recommendation to which the Defendant objected. The Court therefore grants the Defendants motion for summary judgment 33 in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court shall take all steps necessary to close this case. SO…

Ford Motor Company v. MAD Enterprise Group, LLC et al

Filed: May 15, 2017

State: Florida
Court: Florida Middle District Court
Case Number: 6:2016cv01333

ORDER granting 65 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 5/15/2017. (EC)

Joyce Stockton, et al. v. Ford Motor Company-Partial Dissent

Filed: May 12, 2017

State: Tennessee
Court: Court of Appeals
Case Number: W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV

Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven StaffordTrial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.Although I agree with the majority Opinion s discussion of the improper jury instructions given by the trial court in this case, I cannot agree with the majority s analysis with regard to the duty owed by Ford. Because Ford s duty is a threshold issue that must be determined prior to any consideration of the jury instructions given by the trial court, I therefore file this partial dissent.

Joyce Stockton, et al. v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 12, 2017

State: Tennessee
Court: Court of Appeals
Case Number: W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV

Authoring Judge: Chief Judge D. Michael SwineyTrial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.I concur fully in the majority Opinion. I also agree with the dissent that this Court has no authority to overrule or modify Supreme Court s opinions. Bloodworth v. Stuart, 428 S.W.2d 786, 789 (Tenn. 1968). I, however, disagree with the dissent regarding duty of care as the Trial Court was in fact cognizant of and adhered to our Supreme Court s majority opinion in Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation…

Joyce Stockton, et al. v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 12, 2017

State: Tennessee
Court: Court of Appeals
Case Number: W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV

Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny ArmstrongTrial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.This is a jury case. Automobile mechanic and his wife, Appellees, filed suit against Appellant Ford Motor Company for negligence in relation to wife s diagnosis of mesothelioma. Appellees allege that Ford s brake products, which contained asbestos, were unreasonably dangerous or defective such that Ford owed a duty to warn Mr. Stockton so that he, in turn, could protect his wife from exposure to air-borne…

Norris v. Ford Motor Co., et al.

Filed: May 10, 2017

State: Delaware
Court: Superior Court
Case Number: N14C-06-082 ASB

Johnson et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 9, 2017

State: West Virginia
Court: West Virginia Southern District Court
Case Number: 3:2013cv06529

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying in part and granting in part 954 MOTION by Ford Motor Company for Protective Order and OBJECTIONS to Plaintiffs' Service of New Discovery; LIFTING the current stay; directing Ford to produce documents: 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40 by 5/24/2017; GRANTING a protective order as to the remainder of the discovery. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 5/9/2017. (cc: attys; any…

Ford Motor Warranty Cases

Filed: May 8, 2017

State: California
Court: Court of Appeal
Case Number: B277725

Leary v. Ford Motor Company

Filed: May 5, 2017

State: Kentucky
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Case Number: 3:2016cv00048

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell re 14 Motion for Summary Judgment. For reasons set forth, Ford is entitled to summary judgment and Leary's case must be dismissed. A separate order and judgment shall issue. cc:counsel (JAC)