Landmark Case 5.3: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Company, 119 Cal.App.3d 757 (1981) (p. 160) Facts: During the design of the Ford Pinto, engineers became concerned that the placement of the gas tank was unsafe and subject to puncturing and rupturing at low-impact speeds. Engineers recommended halting production until a solution was developed when crash tests confirmed the dangerous design flaw, but Ford's management overruled the engineers and pushed the Pinto into the manufacturing phase after determining that the proposed fix would have a higher overall cost than the risk of liability from lawsuits as a result of injuries to its customers. Grimshaw purchased a Pinto and was injured as a result of the design flaw and, after bringing suit, was awarded $3.5 million. Issue: Is Ford liable for manufacturing the Pinto after having knowledge of this serious design flaw? Ruling: Yes. The dangerous design flaw carried with it the severe risk of injury and there was substantial evidence that Ford's management decided to proceed with the production of the Pinto with full knowledge of this flaw. Answers to case questions: 1. Which view of CSR do you believe Ford's managers were aligned to when making this decision? 2. Suppose that the changes necessary to make the design safer would have cost Ford $1,000 per car, instead $15 per car as the plaintiff alleged. Would that have changed the outcome of the case?