Itís a Sad Day at Toyota

Itís a Sad Day at Toyota

There are 1152 comments on the www.nytimes.com story from Jun 2, 2010, titled Itís a Sad Day at Toyota. In it, www.nytimes.com reports that:

Toyota was left behind licking its chops as everyone else posted tremendous gains. Toyota’s executives are jumping ship and scurrying around like rats.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.nytimes.com.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#919 Oct 7, 2013
Gm man wrote:
My POS import is in the garage AGAIN!!!!! I'm Voice of Reality and I'm gay!!! Toyota turned out to be the maker of vagina!!
Tell me more. sweetie.
No Headlights

United States

#920 Oct 8, 2013
The Duke?
Root

Shreveport, LA

#921 Oct 10, 2013
The toyota death trials are getting hairy.

"Toyota had known since as far back as 2004 that they had a serious problem with sudden acceleration," Beasley said in his opening statement at the trial in state court in Oklahoma City. "We're talking about an automobile accident that occurred not because of anything the driver did or did not do."
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#922 Oct 10, 2013
Opening statements are not evidence.
glox

Cicero, IL

#923 Oct 10, 2013
"Ford just cant seen to keep all its recalls or dealership auto problems hidden from the public...the f250 has to many problems to count...do they recall the truck? Hello No!! They do a dance and sing while the customere gets pissed as hello.........its a quality game and ford is losing!!!!!!!!
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#924 Oct 11, 2013
After deliberation, the jury has declared Toyota " Not Guilty".
This is a bellweather decision which sets a precedent for all future litigation regarding the alleged SUA deaths.
Root

Shreveport, LA

#925 Oct 11, 2013
That is not a bellwether case and it sets no precedent. The case you refer to happened after the woman was hit by another motorist. The SUA cases are completely different and have no prior wreck history in the complaints, most importantly the SUA cases refer to automobile accidents that occurred not because of anything the driver did or did not do.
There are hundreds of these cases coming so get the popcorn ready, this is going to drag on for months.

Toyota just recalled more cars for broken windshield wipers. I hope nobody gets hurt.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#926 Oct 11, 2013
This is a precedent setting decision, in spite of protestations by the Root persona.

Friday, October 11, 2013. Associated Press.

"A California jury on Thursday rejected claims that Toyota was responsible for the death of a woman in a 2009 crash that resulted from a sudden and uncontrollable acceleration of one of its cars.

The Los Angeles Superior Court jury returned the verdict after more than four days of deliberations. The case was one of a large number of lawsuits filed in state and federal courts against the automaker over claims of unintended acceleration in its vehicles.

"We are gratified that the jury concluded the design of the 2006 Camry did not contribute to this unfortunate accident, affirming the same conclusion we reached after more than three years of careful investigation -- that there was nothing wrong with the vehicle at issue in this case," Toyota said in a statement posted on its website.

Calling the case a "bellwether," opinions from both sides of the argument say the verdict also set a "significant benchmark" that Toyota's vehicles are safe with or without a brake override system."
Root

Shreveport, LA

#927 Oct 11, 2013
Nope,sorry... it's not a bellwether case.

There are thousands of toyota's cars on America's roads with broken windshield wipers. Let's hope it doesn't rain.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#928 Oct 11, 2013
The Root doctrine.
If all else fails, deflect.
Root

Shreveport, LA

#929 Oct 11, 2013
Nope, sorry legal puppy, it's not a bellwether case. If you'd have followed the case you would have known it centered around a car that was involved in a crash prior to the death and the argument was that toyota was at fault for not having a brake override system. The majority of SUA trials deal with Toyota's SUA problems, not brake override systems, good try though.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#930 Oct 11, 2013
Is Root a paid troller, or is his trolling strictly voluntary?
Either way, he works very hard at dissing Toyota.
This particular case is a legal precedent, yet he dismisses it.
Wierd.
Root

Shreveport, LA

#931 Oct 11, 2013
Oh as if we didn't know you would start going negative because someone disagrees with you, imagine that. For the sake of interest of just what your reasoning is, I'll entertain. Exactly what does a lawsuit filed by a family that sues toyota for wrongful death after the car was in a wreck and then try to argue if the car had a brake override system all would have been good? That's a pretty ridiculous accusation as it would mean every auto company that didn't have such a system at the time would be responsible. Now that would be a precedent. A ridiculous precedent but a precedent none the less. Again, this case has not an inkling of relevance to any of the hundteds of sua death trials moving forward nor was it a class action hence it was included nor could it have been, that alone speaks volume as the judge would have lumped it into the other Cali cases. While I realize you have limited understanding of case law and what bellwether and precedent mean, this fabricated argument you provide via strawman drawd unnecessary attention to toyota. Frankly I would suggest you try to read between the lines of any AP story as they are completely liberal and provide propaganda to further dilute the low information and gullible crowd.

For what its worth I would be more concerned about toyota's broken windshield wipers, now that can be dangerous.
Root

Shreveport, LA

#932 Oct 11, 2013
Draws
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#933 Oct 11, 2013
Wierd.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#934 Oct 11, 2013
Mr. Root doesn't like Associated Press (calls 'em too liberal), so maybe The New York Times will open up his hopelessly closed mind....

"New York Times, Thursday October 10, 2013

A jury in Los Angeles cleared Toyota Motor of fault on Thursday in a fatal 2009 accident in which a 66-year-old woman crashed her Camry.

The case is the first of about 85 personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits brought against Toyota in California state court because of complaints related to sudden, unintended acceleration and the resulting wave of recalls in 2009 and 2010. The 2006 Camry driven by the victim was not included in the recalls.

The California juryís decision is in line with Toyotaís winning verdicts in cases in New York and Philadelphia. Toyota is also on trial, or scheduled to stand trial, for death and personal injury lawsuits in Oklahoma City, Santa Ana, Calif., and Michigan.

The family of the victim, Noriko Uno, said that Ms. Uno tried to stop her 2006 Camry before crashing into a tree in Upland, Calif., but that a faulty accelerator and the lack of a brake-override system made the car speed out of control in the wrong direction on a one-way street.

It was the first so-called bellwether case in state courts, chosen by a judge to help predict the potential outcome of other lawsuits making similar claims."
Charlene

Los Angeles, CA

#935 Oct 11, 2013
I think Toyota should be given a fair trial w/o Monday morning quarteracks on the internet giving them a bad name.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#936 Oct 11, 2013
Please note the use of the term "Bellwether" in the above report by New York Times.

Also note this latest decision is yet another of several around the country absolving Toyota of blame in SUA litigation.

Now do we looking at a precedent or what?

Incidentally Mr. Root, I am no stranger to litigation insofar as Case Law, Bellwether Decisions, and Precedents are concerned, having written a good many decisions myself in which those attributes played a significant role.
You really need to understand the meaning and impact of these criteria, and quoting "evidence" before getting on your high horse throwing baseless conjecture around and presenting it as fact.
Leagle Beagle

Windsor, Canada

#937 Oct 11, 2013
Charlene wrote:
I think Toyota should be given a fair trial w/o Monday morning quarteracks on the internet giving them a bad name.
Absolutely!!
Root

Shreveport, LA

#938 Oct 11, 2013
Charlene wrote:
I think Toyota should be given a fair trial w/o Monday morning quarteracks on the internet giving them a bad name.
Very good and accurate point, I believe the same. Itís absolutely outrageous to bring this unneeded attention to toyota. Why he does it I have no clue. In my opinion it has a lot to do with personality and a general dislike for others opinions. The bad publicity toyota has received is terrible. Once the AP says something it goes off like a fire cracker. I wish the liberal NY Times didnít get their information from the AP as well.

In another story I read that toyota has some recall problems for broken windshield wipers. My first inclination is to worry about the safety of others. A person like this guy wants to debate the wipers and call you names if you don't agree with him!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Autos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Yanhua Mini ACDP Programming Master Tue EmilyWhtie 1
5 cylinder chevy colorado (May '07) May 14 Mike 323
News Junkyard Gem: 1998 Plymouth Breeze Expresso May 12 Dick Tracy 4
News Majority owners explore sale of NASCAR, sources... May 9 Oh phartse 2
News What Pope Francis and Obama may talk about (Sep '15) May 8 Serial deserters 54
New arrived obd tools recently (info post) May 8 jimmyLIN 1
News Chevy Volt leapfrogs Toyota's Prius (Nov '10) May 3 Watts_Amps 11,794