Farmington Hills Wrongful Death Case to Go to Trial
A federal judge has cleared the way for a jury to decide a wrongful death lawsuit filed by an Oakland County man in the 2005 drunken driving crash that killed his wife and two sons.
In a 35-page opinion issued Monday, U.S. District Judge Paul Borman denied a request by lawyers for UGS Corp. to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Gary Weinstein that alleges the company should be held liable for the conduct of an employee who is intoxicated.
On May 3, 2005, UGS employee Thomas Wellinger plowed his car at 70 mph into a vehicle occupied by Judith Weinstein and her two young sons in Farmington Hills.
All three Weinsteins were killed in the crash.
Wellinger had a blood-alcohol level of 0.43 at the time of the 3:30 p.m. accident; the legal limit in Michigan is 0.08.
Weinstein filed a wrongful death lawsuit against UGS, which is now Siemens. The lawsuit alleges the company knew Wellinger was drunk when he left work that day at 2:45 p.m. and was in the course of his employment — on his way to a doctor’s appointment at the direction of his employer to discuss his alcoholism — at the time of the crash.
Lawyers for UGS say employees saw no signs of intoxication that day and that Wellinger’s appointment was not part of his employment.
Weinstein’s attorney, Barry LaKritz, said Tuesday the case will likely be set for a jury trial sometime after the first of the year.
“We are happy and gratified at this decision because it means we are going to be able to have our day in court with a jury,” LaKritz said. James Feeney, an attorney for UGS, said he would have no comment on the decision.
In his ruling, Borman wrote that the “plaintiff has presented facts from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Siemens controlled Mr. Wellinger’s conduct” and “directed him to attend his doctor’s appointment or face a possible demotion at work, in spite of Mr. Wellinger’s known intoxication that day.”
By ordering Wellinger to the meeting and to report back immediately to his employer as a condition of keeping his job, Siemens “created a foreseeable harm to third parties and therefore had a duty to prevent that harm,” Borman said in his opinion.