The Judiciary Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Judiciary

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

From: TimF	6/15/2011 12:52:31 PM
	of 817

Toyota gets a partial win Inside Line reports: --- In a major victory for Toyota, the federal judge overseeing the multidistrict litigation over alleged acceleration defects in Toyota vehicles has drastically limited the number of claims against the automaker. The ruling says that only California car owners — not those in other states — can take advantage of the state's favorable consumer-protection laws. The action drastically cuts the size of a potential class action against Toyota filed on behalf of consumers and calls into question speculation that the Toyota litigation could cost the automaker upward of $3 billion if it lost the federal case.... U.S. District Judge James V. Selna ruled on June 8 that consumers who relied on Toyota's guarantees of reliability and safety should not be allowed to pursue economic damages under California's state law if they lived or purchased their vehicles in another state. California laws could conflict with those of other states, said the ruling. In addition, California's statute of limitations for the economic-loss claims is more generous than many other states. The suits stem from a recall of more than 8 million vehicles worldwide, mainly related to complaints of sudden acceleration. Toyota has used a NASA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study to argue that the lawsuits are without merit. On May 13, Selna refused the automaker's request to dismiss the litigation, saying that Toyota owners had alleged enough facts establishing overpayment, loss in value or loss in usefulness with regard to the vehicles in question. --- That last paragraph is the one that caught my eye. Basically what the judge is saying is that plaintiffs can prevail under California law against a mostly innocent manufacturer where negative publicity and resulting price declines are caused by an unholy combination of anecdotes about driver error, rapacious plaintiff lawyers, and an unscrupulous mainstream media. What a great state I live in! professorbainbridge.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next