Possibly important for some bus nuts.Re: Tires and SCOTUS

[daddysgirl]

Hi all.
I follow court decisions, and this came in from Justia. The outcome may or may not be of interest. The underlying reason it was filed might be important for some folks. Because it's safety related, I'm sharing.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/581/15-1406/?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_content=seoreportad&utm_campaign=20170419-u-s-supreme-court-4574f225cc

[muldoonman]

My reading comprehension is almost nil as I get older, but how old were these tires??  They always say replace after 5 years to be on the safe side on the heavier vehicles. I'm toast with mine. 

[daddysgirl]

The issue wasn't the age. The issue for SCOTUS was the sanctions against a tire company and attorneys.

However, if you read the case when you have time, (and this is my opinion based on reading the case) the two lower courts made some damning findings... a company knowingly withholding not only court ordered tests that showed the tires should not travel at highway speeds, but also withholding those tests from a plaintiff during discovery...and continuing to market those tires to the RV market. The attorney stumbled on a newspaper article after his case settled where said company released the same information in a different case over the same issue, and because it was settled all they could do was go after sanctions, I believe.
DISCLOSURE: This is a vastly abbreviated opinion of a case that went on for years. All I can say is it changed my opinion of this company.