That Case You Settled Could Rise Up and Bite You- Just Ask Toyota
A Texas state court judge (I know, not the best source of legal precedent) recently lifted a stay on litigation between a paralyzed woman who settled her Camry roll-over claim against Toyota and then later sought to set aside the $1.5 mil settlement . . . based on undisclosed Toyota documents. The plaintiff asserts she would have demanded more in settlement or taken the case to trial if she had the withheld documents. Presumably the settlement agreement contains language that the plaintiff understands and accepts the risk of unknown facts, injuries, etc. The basis must be that Toyota allegedly fraudulently withheld documents. The plaintiff apparently obtained the previously unknown documents from a former Toyota attorney who worked on her case and others and has spilled the beans about the withheld documents.
According to the LA Times, “the ruling could have serious implications for Toyota. If Greene’s allegations are upheld the Japanese automaker could face not only a civil sanction, but also the prospect that dozens — if not hundreds — of other long-closed lawsuits against the automaker could be reconsidered on similar grounds.”
Some friendly advice: Don’t lie. Don’t cheat. Be honest, ethical, and above-board and you and your client won’t face the forced-penance music of the damned.
- Settling Personal Injury Claims in Utah – an Update on Medicare Liens
- Utah Law: Law of the Case Doctrine vs. Mandate Rule
- Settlement Agreements Revisited
- The New Pleading Standard in Federal Court Requires Greater Factual Content
- Proposed Federal Civil Rule Changes: Rules 26 (experts) and 56 (summary judgment)
- Settling Personal Injury Claims in Utah – an Update on Medicare Liens
- Utah Law: Law of the Case Doctrine vs. Mandate Rule
- Settlement Agreements Revisited
- The New Pleading Standard in Federal Court Requires Greater Factual Content
- Proposed Federal Civil Rule Changes: Rules 26 (experts) and 56 (summary judgment)