Ford Motor Company is once again under legal fire over the structural integrity of its Super Duty trucks, as a multi-billion-dollar courtroom battle escalates with new claims of jury misconduct and fresh evidence. At the heart of the controversy is a fatal 2022 rollover crash that claimed the lives of Debra and Herman Mills, who were traveling in their 2015 Ford F-250 when it overturned, fatally crushing them under a collapsed roof.

Last year, a jury awarded the Mills family an astonishing $2.5 billion—one of the largest product liability verdicts in automotive history—after ruling that Ford was liable for the deaths, due to the allegedly inadequate strength of the truck’s roof structure. But five months on, Ford is pushing for a retrial, claiming it has unearthed critical new evidence that could upend the initial verdict.

Jury Misconduct Allegations

According to Ford, recordings have surfaced that allegedly capture post-trial conversations between jurors discussing a previous rollover case—specifically the 2022 trial over the deaths of Melvin and Voncile Hill, which initially ended in a $1.7 billion award against the automaker. The judge in the Mills trial had explicitly barred any mention of the Hill case during deliberations, citing the risk of prejudice. Ford now argues that jurors disobeyed those instructions, compromising the integrity of the verdict.

The automaker contends that these unauthorized discussions may have unduly influenced the jury’s decision to punish Ford harshly. The Hill case had similarly centered on roof collapse during a rollover, and although Ford eventually succeeded in getting the $1.7 billion verdict vacated by the Georgia Appeals Court, the parallels between the two cases are difficult to ignore.

Plaintiffs: Ford Missed Its Window

The Mills family’s legal team is pushing back hard against Ford’s retrial request. Their argument? The recordings—obtained after the trial—are legally inadmissible, amount to hearsay, and were submitted past the court’s March 14 deadline for new trial motions. “Once that bell is rung, it cannot be unrung,” the plaintiffs stated, warning that admitting such recordings would set a dangerous precedent for post-verdict challenges across the judicial system.

They also question the authenticity and credibility of the recordings, suggesting they are being used as a legal Hail Mary rather than substantive evidence of wrongdoing.

A Broader Pattern?

This case is just the latest in a troubling pattern for Ford, which has faced repeated lawsuits over the structural safety of its F-Series trucks—a cornerstone of its vehicle lineup and the best-selling pickup line in the U.S. since the late 1970s.

In March, yet another lawsuit was filed following the death of Steven Horn, who was killed when a gust of wind tipped his F-350 and trailer, crushing him under a collapsed roof. His wife and daughter, who survived, have become vocal advocates for structural reform.

The common thread across these cases? Roofs that allegedly fail to withstand real-world rollover forces, despite federal safety standards. Plaintiffs argue that Ford has long been aware of these design vulnerabilities and failed to act, prioritizing profit over safety.

What Comes Next?

The courts must now decide whether Ford’s newly revealed recordings merit a retrial in the Mills case—a decision that could ripple across the automotive industry. If the recordings are allowed, they could change how post-trial evidence is considered in future civil cases. If not, the $2.5 billion verdict will stand as a monumental warning to automakers about the cost of potential design negligence and the risks of not addressing longstanding safety concerns.

For Ford, a company already under pressure from evolving regulatory and consumer expectations, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Source: Ford