This appeal arose from a $161 million jury award based on a finding that a brake defect caused the plaintiff to crash his Suzuki motorcycle into an SUV that pulled in front of him and abruptly stopped. At trial plaintiff said his front brake failed entirely. But the trial judge excluded plaintiff’s contrary statement to an investigating officer two days after the crash that he “was forced to apply his brakes locking up his wheels,” which notably omitted any mention of brake failure. The jury found the brakes were defective and awarded about $11 million in compensatory damages and $150 million in punitive damages.
Suzuki retained Horvitz & Levy to assist with posttrial motions, which successfully reduced the punitive damages award by $120 million. Suzuki then relied on Horvitz & Levy to handle its appeal from the remaining judgment.
Horvitz & Levy persuaded the Court of Appeal to reverse the judgment based on evidentiary error. The Court of Appeal held that plaintiff’s statement to the police officer should have been admitted as a past recollection recorded, and that the trial court’s evidentiary error was prejudicial because it was central to Suzuki’s defense theory that the crash occurred because plaintiff locked his brakes, not because his front brake failed. Additionally, Horvitz & Levy persuaded the Court of Appeal to hold that plaintiff’s financial condition evidence during the punitive damages phase was insufficient to meet plaintiff’s burden. The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial on liability and compensatory damages only, barring any further claim for punitive damages.
Soulliere v. Suzuki 
