Top Stories

Paul Walker's Daughter Is Suing Porsche in Wrongful Death Lawsuit

Paul Walker's Daughter Is Suing Porsche in Wrongful Death Lawsuit

Paul Walker‘s daughter Meadow has just filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Porsche for her father’s death.

The 16-year-old daughter of the Fast & Furious actor has filed documents which share some gruesome details from her father’s crash in the Porsche Carrera GT, via TMZ.

Law enforcement officials have said that the cause of crash was speeding between 80 to 93 MPH. The lawsuit contests that Roger Rodas, the man who was driving the car, was only going 63 and 71 MPH at the time of the crash.

Her lawyers also say that the car had “a history of instability and control issues.”

“The bottom line is that the Porsche Carrera GT is a dangerous car. It doesn’t belong on the street. And we shouldn’t be without Paul Walker or his friend, Roger Rodas,” Meadow‘s lawyer said in a statement to TMZ.

Just Jared on Facebook
Photos: Getty
Posted to: Paul Walker

JJ Links Around The Web

Getty
  • jason

    speed kills, end of story

  • SquidBillie

    Ridiculous….The driver was at fault, and knew the risks with such a fast car, not to mention the speeding.

  • jane

    well, she can’t sue her dad for stupidity, so sue the car company because her dad was driving their car too fast. makes perfect sense. as dumb as her dad, obviously

  • jane

    well, she can’t sue her dad for stupidity, so sue the car company because her dad was driving their car too fast. makes perfect sense. as dumb as her dad, obviously

  • la petite bonnieux

    Not likely the case will make it to court

  • la petite bonnieux

    Not likely the case will make it to court

  • yep

    Paul wasn’t driving his friend was I usually don’t respond to such dumb comments but its best you know the facts before speaking ill of the dead.Also Paul walker was an amazing human being he cared so much for life and was incredibly sweet you should really reavaluate your life and how you treat people.

  • yep

    Paul wasn’t driving his friend was I usually don’t respond to such dumb comments but its best you know the facts before speaking ill of the dead.Also Paul walker was an amazing human being he cared so much for life and was incredibly sweet you should really reavaluate your life and how you treat people.

  • Mari Lee

    my best friends daddy got a new black Ford Mustang Convertible just by part time work from a macbook. read reviewfterearning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 97 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online.….. Weekly paycheck… Bonus opportunities…earn upto $16k to $19k /a month…Only a few hour required to understand and start working,,,,pol,

    Success Your Dreams And Br your Own Boss.. …look Here…

    ▶▶▶▶▶ http:\ECashdraftAssociationFaceb00kofferLeatestTask______________________________________

  • neil

    ATTENTION, MALWARE!!!

  • SquidBillie

    He wasn’t driving

  • jane

    ok, sorry, so two stupid people were in the car. my error.

  • Will

    Your right you greedy little girl that car doesn’t belong on the road that’s why it belonged on a race track it’s intended purpose, money hungry hhore.

  • Neighbour

    She’s not in it for the money; please, she inherited most of his estate.

    Honestly, my gut instinct says she’ll win something. No matter how many warnings you plaster on a product, if there’s even a small risk of serious injury or death, you need to take it off the shelves. I do think the law is on her side.

    In all a very sad affair.

  • SquidBillie

    This is a CAR. Then, they would have to take EVERY car off the market (not the shelf), because any one of them could be in an accident, causing death or serious injury, including YOUR car.

  • Neighbour

    Go read up the history of this particular model. You’ll see what I mean. It comes with strong warnings, but that’s not going to be enough. I think his daughter will win in some kind of legal action and there will be some sort of punitive element to it. My point is that they should have made it available only to professional racers.

    The issue is reasonable foreseeability. Your reasoning is wrong because potentially any plane ticket could have the same fatal effect. Or a kitchen knife or a pointy umbrella. It’s about foreseeability and product liability, and the history says that this young lady probably has a good chance.

    And by the way, do you have a problem with understanding figurative expressions (“off the shelf”)?

  • Neighbour

    This particular model is well known for being hard to handle. It doesn’t even have electronic stablisation control. It was actually designed for car racing, not everyday driving. Please don’t go around calling people stupid when you clearly don’t even understand the context.

  • Neighbour

    Please, the Carrera GT isn’t just a “fast car.” It hasn’t traction control and other everyday safety benefits that regular consumer cars have. It’s designed to be a race car experience. Look up the other fatal Carrera GT fatal crash that settled for $4.5 million before opining on matters of which you have zero knowledge.

    Walker’s lawsuit also outlines seatbelt defects that she claims led to her father being trapped in the car in the for the 80 seconds between the actual time of the crash and the fire. Even if the car were just a regular consumer car with traction control, she’d still be alleging these defects.

    Translation: it’s not just the stability and control issues (which the lawsuit is saying Porsche knew about and should have corrected by installing a Porsche Stability Management System, which it HAS done on other Porsche models); it’s also about other manufacturing and design defects relating to safety and combustibility.

    In sum: the speed at which the car was being driven is completely unrelated to the claims.

  • Blue42

    Pure greed on her end…No lawsuit is going to bring him back honey….Isn’t the millions of dollars he left you enough??? Greedy Greedy and Greedy! The driver was speeding. Sad, but “End of story!” Give me break!

  • GroundControl500

    The fact that this was being driven at an illegal speed on a residential/commercial street is absolutely a factor in this case. It will most likely be THE factor that obviates any damages. Such reckless behavior will probably be deemed to be the direct cause of death. She should rightly be suing the driver but there probably isn’t any money there.

    Even if they can prove Walker was alive for 60 seconds following the crash – which I question – they would need to prove he was conscious for there to have been pain and suffering from the fire or that any alleged defect contributed to an alleged inability to exit the car.

    It is entirely misplaced to cite the settlement involving a Porsche Carrera GT fatal accident at the California Speedway in 2006. That accident took place on a proper venue, i.e., a race track. Further and more importantly it was a settlement so we don’t know what a jury might have found as to liability or awarded in damages.

    Finally, though the settlement was a reported total of approximately $4.5 million, Porsche only paid 8% while 49% came from the estate of the driver, 41% the track owners & event organizers & 2% from the driver of the Ferrari that was claimed to have triggered the crash.

  • GroundControl500

    See my post above as to why the 2006 Porsche Carrera case is not going to help her. Further why the reckless and illegal speed is very much a factor.

  • Neighbour

    They’re going to tender evidence he breathed in the fumes of the fire, so it’s going to be easy to prove that he was alive after the crash. Even the coroner ruled he died of BOTH injuries and burns, that he was alive for some time after the crash.

    And he was prostrate because of a fault seat-belt design and his injuries because of that seat belt design meant he was locked in the car and unable to get out.

    It’s funny she’s getting all this trash for filing this when the other victim’s wife filed the same type of suit earlier. I agree there are lots of vexatious litigants in the US, but this is a just case, I believe.

    The speed issue? Pahlease. Pull the other one. Look up the Lexus LS 350 incident where the whole family died due to faulty brakes. According to your reasoning, the father shouldn’t have driving at that speed, since that’s what contributed to the accident as well. If you create a faulty vehicle that’s not fit for the average driver and let anyone who can buy it drive it, you’re CONTRIBUTORILY NEGLIGENT. END OF STORY.

    The Carrera GT model shouldn’t have been sold to regular drivers. I certainly wouldn’t go within 10 metres of a moving car with zero traction control. WTF?!!!

  • Neighbour

    Her case draws on seat belt design, fuel tube design, and combustibility of the materials. If you look at the incident, it looks like Porsche was at least contributorily negligent.

    So what if they sped? The point being if they’d been driving at an average sped and a reckless or drunk driver crashed into them and caused the same injuries and fire, Paul Walker would have still been trapped and injured by poor seat belt design and unable to get out, and then burned to death because of (the alleged) combustibility of the car materials.

  • Jessi

    Funny thing is Porsche said it’s NOT race car, so let’s see: It’s not suitable for driving on the street, yet it’s not a race car, so it shouldn’t be driven on a racetrack either.

    I guess it’s only good as a collectible.

  • Nina99

    The problem is that he thought he was as cool in real life as he was in the movies. In real life he was just a man, in a fast car, that was mortal. The end. Move on.

  • Jenny from the flop

    Paul walker and his friends killed themselves because they had to brag and show off how fast and badass they are driving their cars.

    I’m suing for having to hears about this man every damn week!

  • GroundControl500

    The ME report showed results of 14% CO in Walker and 10% CO in Rodas. Healthy individuals don’t even require hospitalization until they are over 25%.

    So the driver, who it was determined died instantly from impact related injuries, had almost as much CO as Walker who maybe lived 60 seconds later and took one breath, maybe 2, before expiring from impact injuries.

    As I stated earlier it is not enough to prove he was alive for seconds after the impacts, they would need evidence he was conscious. There seems to be no evidence of that – you do realize that unconscious people are able to breathe, right?

    It matters not if it can even be proved the seat belt design was faulty in a way that hindered his egress from the car if he was unconscious and would not have been able to get out anyway – thus seat belt design would not have been a factor in his death. There must be a cause and effect – not merely a hypothetical.

    You keep citing irrelevant cases. The speed in the Lexus case was caused by a defect. The Rodas speed was caused by a defect in his own thinking.

    This will all be complicated by reports that the engine was modified as were the rear tires.

    The driver will be brought into the case by Porsche whether Walker’s daughter sues his estate or not. Another huge factor in assigning liability will be the criminal intervening act of speeding and reckless driving.

    Your overarching argument that you are liable if you sell a car that you argue is not fit for the “average driver” – whatever that means – is a non-starter. First these were 2 experienced race drivers. Second, this crash – not hypothetical other crashes – would not have happened as it did if the driver had driven within the law. The loss of control and the deaths and injuries were caused by the high speed impacts.

  • GroundControl500

    I’m sorry, Neighbor, your hypothetical crash is irrelevant to this case.

    But good for you for being such a loyal fan and supporter on his behalf.

  • Neighbour

    Porsche markets this particular model as a race car for the average road. I call this irresponsible as it’s encouraging people to speed in a way.

    Most people don’t realise that there are laws against commercial bodies / companies selling whatever they want just because the consumer would buy it. Drugs being an extreme case in point. This all comes down to the consumer-manufacturer relationship. There’s a responsibility when it comes to the manufacturer. The question is how much. And you’ll see in the US, even in the pro-business US, there are consumer protection laws. Besides, cars are out there on the road and safety impacts everyone on the road, not just passengers and drivers in the vehicle in question.

  • Neighbour

    Porsche markets this particular model as a race car for the average road. I call this irresponsible as it’s encouraging people to speed in a way.

    Most people don’t realise that there are laws against commercial bodies / companies selling whatever they want just because the consumer would buy it. Drugs being an extreme case in point. This all comes down to the consumer-manufacturer relationship. There’s a responsibility when it comes to the manufacturer. The question is how much. And you’ll see in the US, even in the pro-business US, there are consumer protection laws. Besides, cars are out there on the road and safety impacts everyone on the road, not just passengers and drivers in the vehicle in question.

  • Neighbour

    Porsche markets this particular model as a race car for the average road. I call this irresponsible as it’s encouraging people to speed in a way.

    Most people don’t realise that there are laws against commercial bodies / companies selling whatever they want just because the consumer would buy it. Drugs being an extreme case in point. This all comes down to the consumer-manufacturer relationship. There’s a responsibility when it comes to the manufacturer. The question is how much. And you’ll see in the US, even in the pro-business US, there are consumer protection laws. Besides, cars are out there on the road and safety impacts everyone on the road, not just passengers and drivers in the vehicle in question.

  • Neighbour

    Porsche markets this particular model as a race car for the average road. I call this irresponsible as it’s encouraging people to speed in a way.

    Most people don’t realise that there are laws against commercial bodies / companies selling whatever they want just because the consumer would buy it. Drugs being an extreme case in point. This all comes down to the consumer-manufacturer relationship. There’s a responsibility when it comes to the manufacturer. The question is how much. And you’ll see in the US, even in the pro-business US, there are consumer protection laws. Besides, cars are out there on the road and safety impacts everyone on the road, not just passengers and drivers in the vehicle in question.

  • Neighbour

    ” if he was unconscious and would not have been able to get out anyway”

    Hilarious. You do realise he was injured and unconscious BECAUSE of the seat belt design, don’t you? That’s what Walker’s suit is claiming anyway. That the seat belt design directly led to him breaking his ribs and pelvis, and left him trapped. Either way, he was unconscious and therefore unable to get out of the car. He was alive and breathing until the car started burning; that’s an established fact. Did Porsche’s design contribute to or cause his injury and lead the car to burst into flames?

    “they would need evidence he was conscious.”

    Why the heck would they need that? You’re still alive when you’re unconscious; you don’t seem to get that point. His injuries, caused by the seat belt design, led to him being unconscious. Translation: if he hadn’t been injured – by the allegedly poor seat belt design – he’d have been able to escape. Even if he’d been conscious, his pelvic and rib injuries might have prevented him from making a rapid and timely escape.

    “This will all be complicated by reports that the engine was modified as were the rear tires”

    A 500K vehicle is not modified in a vaccum. The car would have been serviced by Porsche on a regular basis. Did they warn the owner? Did they exercise their duty of care? These are the questions that are going to damn Porsche’s role.

    “would not have happened as it did if the driver had driven within the
    law. The loss of control and the deaths and injuries were caused by the
    high speed impacts.”

    That’s an OUTRAGEOUS claim. The lack of electronic stability control could have contributed to the vehicle spinning out of control, or even been the sole or major cause of the crash. The government investigators relied on Porsche techies for advice (please see the LA Times article on this suit for all the details). So no one knows that for sure – YET. That what these cases will determine. If your loved one perished in the same way, you’d want to make sure anyone responsible paid the price. Porsche has absolutely no business selling these types of cars to anyone who can afford to pay.

    “First these were 2 experienced race drivers.”

    Porsche doesn’t require race car experience before selling the GT to consumers. The price is enough. I’m not too sure either of them would have met professional car racing standards in terms of experience or skill anyway.

    The fact they’re selling these cars – no electronic stabilisation control – for everyday usage, outside racetracks means they’re endangering EVERY FRIGGING PERSON on the roads.

    “The speed in the Lexus case was caused by a defect.”

    No, you just don’t get it. The braking system didn’t work. The guy accelerated all by himself; the defect didn’t cause the speeding. But it sure as hell meant they couldn’t stop. By the same token, the defects in the Porsche led to them spinning out of control and PW sustaining injuries that led to him being trapped in the car – as alleged. Speed is only a contributory issue – as alleged. I’d say it’s not even particularly relevant because (1) retaining control is such a critical matter in any car and (2) loss of control could have been sparked off by someone crashing into you or other causes completely outside of your control.

    But anyway, of course it’ll be Porsche’s insurance company that ends up paying anything anyway.

  • Neighbour

    ” if he was unconscious and would not have been able to get out anyway”

    Hilarious. You do realise he was injured and unconscious BECAUSE of the seat belt design, don’t you? That’s what Walker’s suit is claiming anyway. That the seat belt design directly led to him breaking his ribs and pelvis, and left him trapped. Either way, he was unconscious and therefore unable to get out of the car. He was alive and breathing until the car started burning; that’s an established fact. Did Porsche’s design contribute to or cause his injury and lead the car to burst into flames?

    “they would need evidence he was conscious.”

    Why the heck would they need that? You’re still alive when you’re unconscious; you don’t seem to get that point. His injuries, caused by the seat belt design, led to him being unconscious. Translation: if he hadn’t been injured – by the allegedly poor seat belt design – he’d have been able to escape. Even if he’d been conscious, his pelvic and rib injuries might have prevented him from making a rapid and timely escape.

    “This will all be complicated by reports that the engine was modified as were the rear tires”

    A 500K vehicle is not modified in a vaccum. The car would have been serviced by Porsche on a regular basis. Did they warn the owner? Did they exercise their duty of care? These are the questions that are going to damn Porsche’s role.

    “would not have happened as it did if the driver had driven within the
    law. The loss of control and the deaths and injuries were caused by the
    high speed impacts.”

    That’s an OUTRAGEOUS claim. The lack of electronic stability control could have contributed to the vehicle spinning out of control, or even been the sole or major cause of the crash. The government investigators relied on Porsche techies for advice (please see the LA Times article on this suit for all the details). So no one knows that for sure – YET. That what these cases will determine. If your loved one perished in the same way, you’d want to make sure anyone responsible paid the price. Porsche has absolutely no business selling these types of cars to anyone who can afford to pay.

    “First these were 2 experienced race drivers.”

    Porsche doesn’t require race car experience before selling the GT to consumers. The price is enough. I’m not too sure either of them would have met professional car racing standards in terms of experience or skill anyway.

    The fact they’re selling these cars – no electronic stabilisation control – for everyday usage, outside racetracks means they’re endangering EVERY FRIGGING PERSON on the roads.

    “The speed in the Lexus case was caused by a defect.”

    No, you just don’t get it. The braking system didn’t work. The guy accelerated all by himself; the defect didn’t cause the speeding. But it sure as hell meant they couldn’t stop. By the same token, the defects in the Porsche led to them spinning out of control and PW sustaining injuries that led to him being trapped in the car – as alleged. Speed is only a contributory issue – as alleged. I’d say it’s not even particularly relevant because (1) retaining control is such a critical matter in any car and (2) loss of control could have been sparked off by someone crashing into you or other causes completely outside of your control.

    But anyway, of course it’ll be Porsche’s insurance company that ends up paying anything anyway.

  • Neighbour

    I’m not a fan of Paul Walker per se; it’s just basic reasoning on the evidence as I see it. Your opinion is irrelevant to this case because you don’t even understand what the Walker suit is alleging. They’re alleging the seat belt design caused his injury. Start there. Good luck with that! I’m sure you’ll get it eventually.

  • jane

    any car is hard to handle if it’s going in excess of 100. lol. not a compelling argument.

  • jane

    any car is hard to handle if it’s going in excess of 100. lol. not a compelling argument.

  • Neighbour

    No electronic stabilisation control system a sufficiently compelling argument for you? I’d like to see you drive such a car at 60 on a rainy day.

  • Pensive

    “It’s designed to be a race car experience…” what you said…that’s certainly how Rodas was treating this car when he drove it in a regular street, which he shouldn’t have been doing then-knowing that it was designed for a “race car” venue…a dangerous stunt. In sum: no safety feature is 100% guaranteed to protect you from reckless driving.

  • Neighbour

    You’re clueless about product liability.

  • Ed Sloan

    The passenger side of the car impacted the pole…Im sure the deformation from the impact was the cause of his entrapment.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here