Isuzu Suit Against Consumer Reports Goes to Jury

After two months of testimony on subjects ranging from auto dynamics to journalism ethics, Isuzu Motors’ $242-million product-disparagement and defamation lawsuit against Consumer Reports magazine went to a federal jury Friday.

The Japanese auto maker has accused the magazine and its nonprofit parent, Consumers Union, of rigging tests to show that the 1995-96 Trooper sport utility vehicle is prone to rolling over during emergency lane changes.

Consumers Union calls the allegations preposterous and charges that Isuzu is trying to silence its voice as an honest and independent critic.

Lawyers for both sides summed up their cases Friday in closing arguments to a 10-member Los Angeles federal court jury. The panel is to begin deliberating Monday.

According to evidence presented by Consumers Union, the Trooper tipped up on two wheels in 75 out of 192 zigzag test maneuvers designed to simulate what might happen if a child darted in front of the vehicle while it was traveling at 33 miles an hour.

In his final remarks to the jury on Friday, Isuzu’s lead attorney, Andrew M. White, said it is conventional wisdom among auto safety engineers that any skilled professional driver could force an SUV to tip.

That, he said, is what occurred during Consumers Union’s tests.

White said Consumers Union officials decided to “trash” the Trooper as part a calculated publicity stunt to boost magazine sales and to force the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to adopt rollover safety standards for SUVs.

“For CU, the truth doesn’t matter,” he declared.

He criticized the magazine for failing to tell its readers that the federal highway safety agency considers the rollover tests unscientific.

And he blasted the publication for going public with its findings without first soliciting comment from Isuzu.

In his closing argument, Consumer Union lawyer Joseph T. Cotchett denied that anyone was out to get Isuzu.

“It didn’t happen,” he told the jurors. “There is no such evidence” to support that claim.

He said Consumers Union made no secret about its disagreement with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over testing.

Consumers Union has “always taken on NHTSA,” he said. “They took on NHTSA about baby seats, they took on NHTSA about tires. They go out there and take on all sorts of government agencies for the citizens of this country.”

He also noted that Isuzu had employed the same type of rollover tests used by Consumers Union.

Cotchett said that Consumer Reports’ October 1996 cover article about the Trooper was an expression of opinion, entitled to special protection under 1st Amendment case law.

He challenged Isuzu’s claim that the Consumer Reports article caused the company to suffer $242 million in lost sales and damage to its reputation. In fact, he said, Isuzu’s internal documents showed that a sales drop-off had been caused mostly by other by factors. including stiffer competition, cutbacks in advertising expenditures, large inventories and aggressive leasing programs.

Consumer Reports has been sued a dozen times by companies whose products it criticized. The magazine says it has never lost a case or paid damages in an out-of-court settlement. In one case, Bose Corp., a maker of audio equipment, won a $210,000 judgment against Consumers Union, but the verdict was overturned in an appeal the U.S. Supreme Court.