---

Legal Attorney Warns Consumers about Chrysler's unsafe Minivans

27 October 1997

Attorney Representing Plaintiffs Against Chrysler Seeks to Remind Public of Facts Behind Death of 6-Year-Old Boy

    CHARLESTON, S.C., Oct. 27 -- The following was issued today
by Joye Law Firm:

    On October 8, 1997, 10 jurors sent a significant statement to Chrysler
Corporation , the nation's number 3 automaker.  As one leading safety
expert has said, "the jury sent Chrysler a $250 million message to stop its
lobbying and spend its money building better cars."
    On Friday, Chrysler appealed that verdict in a federal court in South
Carolina, characterizing the jury as having been swayed by emotion, rather
than facts.
    "Chrysler's appeal is not surprising," noted Reese I. Joye, the attorney
of the Jimenez family, who brought the case against Chrysler.  "This appeal is
just part of the legal process.  We are very confident that the October 8th
verdict in federal court was appropriate and fair," he added.
    The case in question involved the death of six-year-old Sergio Jimenez,
who was riding in the rear section of a 1985 Dodge Caravan minivan when it was
struck on the driver's side by a smaller car traveling 10 miles an hour.
    According to six eyewitnesses, the rear gate opened during the roll-over,
and Sergio was ejected from the large opening.  The two other van passengers,
Sergio's mother, Denise, and sister, Maria, remained inside the van, and
suffered minor bruises.  During the month-long trial, medical and safety
experts explained to the jury that in the case of a motor vehicle accident,
survival rates soar when occupants remain in the vehicle.  Standard safety
statistics, which have been accepted for more than 40 years, find that the
chance of survival in an automotive crash are 500 times better if an occupant
remains in the car, rather than being thrown from it.
    "Chrysler marketed these minivans as safe enough for your 'most precious
cargo,'" Joye said.  "And yet the latch system they used on this rear door was
deemed unsafe as far back as the early 1960s.  We demonstrated that Chrysler
did not engineer that latch, which controlled the security of the minivan's
largest opening, for safety."
    Joye and other attorneys noted during the trial that Chrysler had marketed
its minivans as having "enough room to move around in."
    The punitive damages which Chrysler is currently appealing were set by a
10 person jury.  At the start of the trial, Joye noted, the jury appeared
equally divided on the issue of awarding punitive damages against major
American corporations.  "The facts we represented, which proved that
Chrysler's top management had willfully ignored a deadly safety defect in
their minivans, turned those jurors around," Joye said.
    Among the pieces of evidence entered into the case were a number of
internal Chrysler memos from top managers which indicated that:

    -- Chrysler was made aware of the safety defect as early as 1988.
    -- Chrysler was the only automaker using the defective, headless striker,
       and its engineers could not offer explanation as to why the minivan's
       design required them to remove the safe, headed striker (a simple end
       bolt) from the original latches supplied by a parts manufacturer.
    -- Chrysler destroyed crash test memos, computer records and other
       documents in an attempt to hide executives' knowledge of the safety
       defect.
    -- Chrysler executives attempted to leverage political pressure in
       Washington to  avert a product recall, which would prove financially
       costly and would have a negative effect on its minivan sales program.
    -- Chrysler's own internal cost analysis indicated that latch mechanisms
       could be retooled and made safe for as little as 25 cents per vehicle;
       and Chrysler budgeted $110 million for communications and retooling in
       their eventual Voluntary Service Action.  That action alerted minivan
       owners to "media sensationalism" surrounding the latch safety issue,
       and offered to replace their latches primarily to offer "peace of
       mind."

    As to the punitive damages assessed by the jury, plaintiffs attorneys
remind observers that punitive damages are intended to punish egregious,
reprehensible behavior, and to deter future such offenses.  "We asked the jury
to send Chrysler a clear message that conduct of this nature does not pay,"
Joye said.
    "The punitive damages that this conservative jury brought against Chrysler
represent a large sum to the general public.  But in truth, they represent to
Chrysler a fraction of their profits on minivans," Joye said.  "During the 30
days in which we tried this case, Chrysler made $210 million on minivan
sales."
    On Friday, Chrysler asked the federal judge in Charleston to reverse the
$262.5 million verdict (which included $12.5 million in compensatory damages
to the Jimenez family in the wrongful death suit) against the company, grant a
new trial or reduce the damages award.  If that motion is not granted, the
company will petition the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, VA.
    "Meanwhile," said Joye, "we hope that this verdict was publicized well
enough to prompt any minivan owners who still have those deadly rear door
latches to have them replaced.  That was our desire all along -- to ensure
that never again will a family suffer the horrible consequences that the
Jimenez family suffered at the hands of negligence such as we uncovered at
Chrysler."

SOURCE  Joye Law Firm