Latest Ruling Clears Way To Determine If Toyota Hid Evidence Of Safety Issues

An arbitrator has ruled that a former Toyota Motor Corp. attorney can use internal company documents to press his claim that he was hired to "plan and carry out discovery fraud" on behalf of the company.

The ruling, which comes over objections from the automaker that the documents were privileged, did not determine whether Toyota committed such fraud. Instead, the decision found that former Toyota attorney Dimitrios Biller could use internal e-mails, test reports, memos and other documents as evidence in the case.

The ruling is the second legal setback for Toyota in the last two weeks.



2011 Bentley Continental GT Photo Gallery

2011 Dodge Durango Photo Gallery

2011 Lincoln MKZ Hybrid & MKX

2011 Lexus IS Photo Gallery

2011 Hyundai Equus Photo Gallery

AutoSpies.com Photo Galleries

If you want to see your photos running on our homepage photo ticker, be sure to upload your photos on the go by sending them to Mobile@AutoSpies.com

Share on Facebook

Read Article

Joe_Limon - 9/13/2010 11:22:49 AM

+2 Boost

It's only a legal setback if the documents hold merit to the accusers case... Meaning, if guilty they're caught, if innocent it'll blow over.

Joe_Limon - 9/13/2010 12:28:32 PM

+2 Boost

to whoever deboosts me... how am I wrong? Or are you agreeing that I am right, and you are just have a hard time facing the truth so you take out your anger by deboosting me? :P

Steve - 9/13/2010 1:00:33 PM

+1 Boost

+1 for Joe_Limon. I'm waiting for the dust to settle before condemning or excusing Toyota.

Agent009 - 9/13/2010 2:48:10 PM

+1 Boost

I think everyone needs to let it clear. At least the relevant information will not be suppressed in this case.

Steve - 9/13/2010 3:52:44 PM

+1 Boost

'009 said "I think everyone needs to let it clear. At least the relevant information will not be suppressed in this case."

Yup. But as we can see by the voting on this thread, there are those who have already made up their mind that Toyota is guilty, so they believe that any information to the contrary must certainly be a lie.

As you believe, so shall you perceive.

upwards - 9/13/2010 11:26:27 PM

+1 Boost

Is that not how things work on autospies? Minds already made up.

thstone - 9/13/2010 5:47:15 PM

+1 Boost

I know that this is an auto-centric site, but the bigger question that this case addresses is that the attorney-client priviledge is null and void if you can convince a judge that there MIGHT be a chance that a crime was committed. Previously, the plantiff had to have clear evidence that a crime WAS committed.

This same criteria could be used against "journalists" (which now includes bloggers and website writers like the Spies) who share a similar protection within the law in regards to outing their sources.