The Alabama Supreme Court has denied a motion by the Cooper Tire & Rubber Company to escape liability for the death of a teenager in a 2018 auto crash caused by the tread separation of one of the company’s tires. Cooper sought to dismiss the claim for lack of specific personal jurisdiction, arguing that Alabama courts did not have authority to decide the  claims.

More specifically, the defense asserted that the plaintiffs had not shown that Cooper Tire had sold, distributed, and marketed the particular tire model  in Alabama in the three years before the underlying accident. They further argued that the passengers in the vehicle were not Alabama residents, so the state’s courts were not the proper forum for the action.

In the decision, the court applied precedent established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court (2021), finding that “Cooper Tire’s unrefuted sale, distribution, and advertising in Alabama of the particular tire model at issue” established jurisdiction. Further, the court found  “the trial court’s findings concerning the timing of Cooper Tire’s contacts with Alabama before the underlying accident and (the deceased’s) place of residency are not dispositive of the jurisdictional question here.”

The firm’s Wes Ball, attorney for the family, believes the ruling will guide jurisdictional issues that affect other states when defendants choose to continue a push to have cases dismissed on similar grounds.

“We have now won in cases raising this question in Alabama, Minnesota and The U. S. Supreme Court, says Mr. Ball. “Other states have and will follow suit due to our efforts.”

The ruling remands the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.