Ninth Circuit Hands Safety Advocates Victory Over Chrysler

Corporation conceals deadly defect. Someone dies, and their family sues. Corporation settles quietly. Court records are sealed. Nobody finds out.

Jennifer Bennett Public Justice

Jennifer Bennett
Public Justice

More people are hurt. More people sue. More settlements are reached. More records are sealed.

“This is how GM was able to hide an ignition switch defect that killed over a hundred people for more than a decade,” says Jennifer Bennett, an attorney with Public Justice in Oakland, California.  “It’s how Remington concealed evidence that its most popular rifle can fire without anyone pulling the trigger.”

But because of a Ninth Circuit decision handed down in Velasco v. Chrysler, “it is now much harder for corporations to enlist courts in keeping their secrets,” Bennett says.

Chrysler was represented by Thomas Dupree and Sarah Boyce of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, D.C.

The Ninth Circuit held that there is a strong presumption that any court record that is “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” should be open to the public.

And it rejected Chrysler’s argument that this presumption should apply only to court records that result in a final determination on the merits of the case.

“This is a big deal,” Bennett says. “It makes the settle-and-conceal model of handling corporate misconduct much more difficult to pull off. Corporations can no longer hope to prevent public access to court records simply by settling a case before a court gets a chance to make a final determination.”

“Velasco itself is the perfect example. It’s a class action alleging that Chrysler concealed a dangerous safety defect in the power system of possibly millions of its cars — a defect that could cause a vehicle to stop without warning while driving full-speed on the highway. The plaintiffs filed a preliminary injunction motion arguing that this defect is so dangerous that the court should require Chrysler to warn its drivers immediately. The district court denied the motion and sealed most of the evidence the plaintiffs submitted.”

Representing the Center for Auto Safety, Public Justice moved to intervene in the case to unseal the court records.

The district court denied the motion, primarily because it accepted Chrysler’s argument that the strong presumption of public access to court records only applies to records that result in a final determination on the merits of a case — ordinarily, preliminary injunction motions don’t fit that bill, Bennett said.

“The district court stated that we could revisit the issue once there was a final determination, at which point the court would ‘subject’ Chrysler’s secrecy claims ‘to significantly more scrutiny,’” Bennett said.

“But that time will never come. The case settled before there could be any final determination. Thanks to the Ninth Circuit’s decision, though, Chrysler can’t simply settle its way out of disclosure. If it wants the court records to remain sealed, it will now have to prove that there are compelling reasons for secrecy sufficient to overcome the strong presumption that the records should be open to the public—a very high bar. This is a huge victory for transparency, accountability, and public safety.”

Copyright © Corporate Crime Reporter
In Print 48 Weeks A Year

Built on Notes Blog Core
Powered by WordPress