Our Pittsburgh lawyers rarely post an article about a single verdict in Pennsylvania, but one recent PA jury verdict stands apart and shows just how far jurors will go, to punish a company believed to have seriously harmed the Plaintiff.
Amagaso v. Mitsubishi Motors
In 2017, Francis Amagasu, age 58, was driving a Mitsubishi GT 3000 while wearing a seatbelt. Then, when he swerved to avoid another vehicle, his vehicle rolled over and his seatbelt failed. As a result, he suffered a severe spinal injury that rendered him a quadriplegic at not even sixty (60) years old.
Counsel for the Plaintiff
For this accident in Buckingham Township, PA, Mr. Amagasu retained local counsel in Philadelphia where they filed suit against Mitsubishi. The legal team included attorneys Daniel Sherry Jr., Nancy Winkler, and Jessica Colliver of Philadelphia-based Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck.
And with that, the battle lines were drawn.
Evidence of Liability and Damages?
To prove Mitsubishis’ liability the Plaintiff’s team focused on the seatbelt’s “rip-stitch” design. Mitsubishi designed its seatbelt to rip apart to — supposedly — better manage the forces in an impact. This, according to the Plaintiff’s team and their experts, was not only dangerous, but it created a preventable danger known to Mitsubishi prior to the life-changing accident in this case.
As for damages: “Mr. Amagasu lives in a rehab facility now, but it may as well just be a prison cell,” says attorney Wes Ball of Farrar & Ball in Houston. “He’s in a 10 by 12 room and has had to re-learn how to speak. But he testified and the jury heard his voice, loud and clear.”
The Verdict
In 2023, a Philadelphia jury unanimously found in favor of Mr. Amagasu, awarding him almost $977 million, and with interest, the verdict surpasses one billion dollars.
But how?
To aid the jury’s comprehension of engineering concepts, the team at Farrar & Ball produced animated videos as demonstrative evidence. It is believed that such visual technology played a key role in driving the point home (no pun intended) about how Mitsubishi’s seatbelt design resulted in such a catastrophic outcome.
Why is Mr. Amagasu’s Verdict So Important?
First of all, nobody should discount the Amagasu verdict as an irrelevant outlier relative to other verdicts. To the contrary, massive plaintiff verdicts are part of a grown trend in PA. In fact, verdicts throughout Pennsylvania have been trending upward for years and especially after the COVID pandemic — for whatever reason. Secondly, only rarely (15% or less) do appellate courts reverse multi-million dollar personal injury verdicts. In short, an appellate court will likely refrain from overturning the verdict.
In fact, our United States Supreme Court has decided that an award for punitive damages can be excessive, but only when it exceeds ten (10) times the award for actual damages. Here, The verdict on behalf of Francis Amagasu was $176 million for compensatory damages, alone. The award for punitive damages was “only” $800 million in punitive damages, well within the Supreme Court’s directive.
The Bottom Line
It’s simple.
Nobody should underestimate a jury’s willingness to hold accountable any corporation — especially those with deep pockets — who are perceived as having seriously injured someone from putting their own profits over human safety. Otherwise, things will continue getting worse, and worse, and worse for corporate defendants in Pennsylvania and beyond. To learn more about run-amore, feel free to read our blog articles or visit our frequently asked questions page right here.
Let’s Get Started!
Our Western Pennsylvania law firm is based in Pittsburgh and serves the surrounding counties. Thus, if you need local counsel anywhere in Western Pennsylvania, contact us today for a free consultation to learn your legal rights in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
412.342.0992
