Court Orders Tire Manufacturer to Pay Victims $220 Million After Fatal Ford Excursion Crash
Philip Uwaoma
Mon, December 29, 2025 at 3:00 PM UTC
4 min read
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Generate Key Takeaways
The verdict resonated far beyond the courtroom where it was decided — a jury in New Mexico has ordered the French tire maker Michelin to pay a drool-inducing $220 million in damages after a catastrophic tire failure on a Ford Excursion SUV resulted in the deaths of three family members. This case, centered on allegations of defective tire design and inadequate warnings, has drawn intense scrutiny across the automotive industry and the legal world.
The tragedy dates back to July 12, 2021, when Laura Marín Zamarippa was driving with her mother, Rosalva Marín, and her 14-year-old sister, Alexis Zamarippa, along a highway in Gaines County, Texas. According to court documents, their Excursion SUV’s left front tire, a Michelin LTX M/S2 tire manufactured in 2014, suddenly failed. As the tire gave way, the SUV lost control, crossed into oncoming traffic, and collided head-on with a Chevrolet 2500 pickup. All three occupants of the Ford died at the scene.
Jury Holds Michelin Fully Accountable for Defective Tire and Massive Damages
The lawsuit that followed was filed by the widower of Rosalva Marín and consolidated with claims from the Zamarippa family. Plaintiffs argued that the LTX M/S2 tire was inherently defective at the point of sale because of its internal construction. Specifically, the complaint centered on a flawed skim stock adhesive layer—a bond between steel belts within the tire that plaintiffs said was improperly applied.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
That defect, they claimed, made the tire prone to tread separation and catastrophic failure, especially as the tire aged. The suit also alleged an inferior belt system and inadequate curing during manufacturing that made the tire defective from the start.
In addition to charging that the tire itself was unsafe, the lawsuit accused both Michelin and the retailer Discount Tire of failing to give clear warnings about how tire performance can degrade over time. Plaintiffs contended that consumers were not adequately informed about the risks of driving on older tires and how age could contribute to sudden breakdowns.
After hearing evidence, a jury found Michelin completely responsible for the crash. Jurors assigned 100 percent of the blame to the tire maker and rejected assertions that the tire’s age, mileage, or external factors should bear any of the responsibility.
The company now faces a steep financial burden, with the $220 million verdict including both compensatory and punitive elements. Part of the award is earmarked for mental anguish and loss of companionship for surviving family members, with individual amounts ranging from $5 million to $6.25 million per claimant.
Michelin Appeals as Case Raises Questions About Tire Lifespan and Liability
Michelin has stated that it strongly disagrees with the verdict and plans to pursue an appeal. The company notes that the tire in question had traveled around 70,000 miles and was seven years old at the time of the crash, indicating it had seen extensive service. Still, Michelin insists it stands by the quality and safety of its products and intends to use “all available legal mechanisms” to seek relief from the judgment.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
This case is significant for several reasons. It highlights the complex questions around product lifecycle and safety warnings for automotive components that might degrade over time. Tires are one of the most critical safety elements on any vehicle, yet there is no universally accepted expiration date for them in the United States.
Without clear guidance or labeling requirements on how long a tire can be expected to perform safely, manufacturers and sellers are increasingly vulnerable to lawsuits when failures occur.
The verdict also arrives in the context of growing legal pressure on automakers and their suppliers. In recent years, major companies including Ford itself have faced other large verdicts and multi-million-dollar lawsuits over alleged design defects and safety failures in their vehicles and components.
These include cases involving fatal rollover accidents and structural issues in trucks, and they have prompted debate over corporate accountability and how juries assign blame in complex technical matters.
For Michelin and the automotive supply chain more broadly, the Excursion case may force a closer look at how manufacturing standards, age-related degradation, and consumer warnings are handled. It is a legal moment that could ripple into manufacturing practices, legal strategies, and even regulatory discussions about how to protect drivers when critical equipment ages.