49 results for 'cat:"Vehicle" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Salter finds that the circuit court improperly granted summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings a matter concerning a dispute of ownership of a semi truck. However, the lower court correctly determined that “drafting errors” alleged by the semi owner would not, themselves, preclude obtaining the title to the property. Affirmed in part.
Court: South Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: Salter , Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 2024SD24, Categories: vehicle, contract
J. Whitney orders a car insurance company and a driver who was injured in a collision in 2018 to submit supplemental briefs detailing whether the court should exercise its jurisdiction to resolve a policy coverage dispute in North Carolina or wait until an underlying suit in South Carolina is resolved. The collision occurred in South Carolina. Although the insurance of the driver at fault paid out according to its limit of $100,000 on the injured driver’s claim, he alleges that the costs of treatment for his injuries exceed this amount. The insurance company claims the injured driver is not entitled to additional coverage under its uninsured motorist policy because he failed to comply with certain notice provisions under North Carolina state law and the uninsured motorist policy. Thus, both parties must submit supplemental briefs to proceed.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Whitney, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv28, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Novak denies Mercedes' motion to dismiss breach of warranty claims. A consumer purchased a van that, despite seven visits to three agents of the manufacturer, still does not function properly. The manufacturer wrongly claims the van doesn't fall under the federal warranty law because it is a commercial vehicle, but the consumer uses it as his personal vehicle.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Novak, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv755, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: vehicle, Warranty, contract
J. Lasnik denies Mercedes-Benz summary judgment for an unjust enrichment claim in the consumer's class action alleging that Mercedes-Benz manufactured and sold vehicles with defective brakes. Mercedes-Benz argues that the Washington Products Liability Act preempts the consumer's unjust enrichment claim, but the consumer is seeking to recover economic losses which the WPLA does not preempt, and the consumer plausible infers that the money he paid for the vehicle enriched Mercedes-Benz.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lasnik, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv665, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: vehicle, Product Liability, contract
J. Fitzgerald finds in favor of Mercedes-Benz USA against the consumer's complaint that it sold a defective used 2017 Mercedes-Benz C300 but did not honor its new vehicle limited warranty, which extends “to the original and each subsequent owner of a new Mercedes- Benz vehicle that any authorized Mercedes-Benz Center will make any repairs or replacements necessary to correct defects in material or workmanship, but not design, arising during the warranty period.” Part of the warranty does not apply because the consumer bought the vehicle from CarMax, not Mercedes-Benz, and the other obligations do not apply because Mercedes-Benz did not breach the warranty when it provided free repairs to address the malfunctioning ECO start/stop feature during the warranty period.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Fitzgerald, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv3049, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: vehicle, Warranty, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly limited the insurer's liability under the underinsured motorist policy's $1 million limit by sums the driver received from other sources. The insurer is entitled to offset the limit by a settlement in a personal-injury lawsuit and a workers' compensation award. Between the sums received from other sources, and the insurer's payment of $672,000, the driver recovered a total of $1 million, thus fulfilling the purpose of underinsured motorist coverage under Illinois law. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 22-2776, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Samour finds the appeals court erroneously determined the "regular use vehicle" exclusion for uninsured motorist benefits in the classic car owner's policy was unenforceable. Although this court has previously found such benefits cannot be tied to use of a particular type of vehicle, the policy at issue in this case works in tandem with a standard policy that has its own uninsured motorist benefits and, therefore, allows for the exclusion. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Samour, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 2024 CO 17, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Simon awards the car owner $20,000 in attorney fees and $518 in costs following a default judgment in his favor in his complaint that the car shop did not restore a 1966 Ford Mustang, lied about the restoration status, and returned the vehicle needing significant repairs. The car owner's requested hourly rates are reasonable but not all billed hours are reasonable.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv1387, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: vehicle, Attorney Fees, contract
J. McFarland denies both parties' motion for summary judgment on the contract claim brought by the car dealership, ruling that while its lease agreement with the cab company allowed it to demand the full amounts of loans following a single missed payment, the cab company's obligations under the agreement may have been waived if the dealership charged it for the lease of vehicles that were never actually leased; therefore, there is a question of fact that must be submitted to a jury.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: McFarland, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv386, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Evidence, vehicle, contract
J. Dimke grants default judgment to the insurance company for its complaint that it has no duty to cover the insured's claim relating to a collision that occurred when someone else was driving his insured vehicle. The loss is excluded by the policy's employee exclusion clause, as the insurance company believes that the man who drove the car during the accident was the insured's employee. The insured's lack of cooperation in confirming or denying this prejudiced the insurance company in this case.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Dimke, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv5043, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Hassan finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the auto body shop owner in a dispute with an engine servicer over its failure to return his vehicles. The evidence was sufficient to support the jury's damages assessment as to the vehicles and its finding that the engine servicer violated the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Hassan, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 14-23-00239-CV, Categories: vehicle, contract
J. Mahan grants the insurer's partial motion for summary judgment on a company owner's commercial vehicle collision coverage-related claims. The policy holder is the business, not the owner, and the owner lacks standing.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Mahan , Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv879, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Kleeh denies the automobile loan service provider's motion to stay and compel arbitration of the customer's breach of contract suit claiming it improperly charged her a $2.75 fee to use her debit card to make installment payments with a third-party platform. The loan service provider cannot compel arbitration since the terms and conditions of the third-party platform's arbitration agreement do not provide for enforcement of its agreement by a non-signatory.
Court: USDC Northern District of West Virginia, Judge: Kleeh, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv45, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Arbitration, vehicle, contract
J. Reyes finds that the lower court properly found for the insurer, which denied the insured motorcyclist's attempt to "stack" uninsured motorist coverage limits from three separate policies. The policies unambiguously provide that such coverage limits may not be aggregated or combined. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Reyes, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 230193, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Hanisee finds the lower court properly found for the state tax department and denied the used car dealership's request for refunds of various excise taxes on vehicles that were returned by the buyers. Although New Mexico's gross receipts tax includes an exemption for returns, the excise tax on used vehicles is an entirely separate statute and does not include a return exemption; therefore, the initial sales of the vehicles were final and binding. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Hanisee, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-39739, Categories: Tax, vehicle, contract
J. Holcomb finds in favor of Mercedes-Benz USA against the customer’s complaint accusing the company of refusing to repair or replace a defective 2021 Mercedes-Benz GLA250W. The customer leased the defective vehicle from Mercedes-Benz of Ontario, an MBUSA-affiliated dealership, but MBUSA was not implicated in the customer’s lease and it did not provide a new warranty for the vehicle, meaning it is not liable for any defects.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Holcomb, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv1914, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: vehicle, Warranty, contract
J. Messitte partially dismisses an insurer’s motion to dismiss in this insurance dispute stemming from two highly valuable Porsches being stolen from the insured’s home. The insured seeks breach of contract and declaratory judgment because the insurer denied the claims, stating that the cars had never been registered. The breach of contract claim is denied since the insured could state a claim and the declaratory judgment items will be resolved through the breach of contract.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Messitte, Filed On: December 28, 2023, Case #: 8:23cv310, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract
J. Johnson grants the defendant companies' motion to compel arbitration in this lawsuit involving a vehicle service contract. The car owners sued the companies for breach of contract after their claim for coverage was denied. However, they fail to show why arbitration is improper, given the contract's arbitration provision. Additionally, the court will dismiss the case without prejudice, instead of staying the proceedings.
Court: USDC Northern District of Oklahoma , Judge: Johnson, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv34, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Arbitration, vehicle, contract
J. Shubb denies, in part, Subaru’s motion to dismiss an automotive group’s claims arising from a dispute regarding the construction of a dealership. The group has sufficiently pleaded its contract claim related to Subaru's call on a letter of credit.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Shubb, Filed On: December 15, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv997, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Construction, vehicle, contract
J. Gremillion finds that the trial court properly dismissed the dealer services company's breach of contract suit against the automotive group over the failure to meet sales quotas for various services including extended warranty contracts. The witness and expert testimony supports the finding that the dealer agreement was not valid due to a forged signature. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Gremillion, Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: CA-23-195, Categories: vehicle, contract
J. Rothstein denies the insurance company partial summary judgment on the insured's extracontractual claims that while the insurance company acknowledged that the insured was injured in a car collision, it wrongfully disputes that his left knee replacement surgery was medically necessary and thus it asserts that it is not responsible for covering the associated medical expenses. At this time, neither party conclusively shows whether the insurance company's offer was unreasonably low because there are still issues of material fact.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Rothstein, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1551, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, contract