68 results for 'nos:"Contract Product Liability - 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
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. Drozd denies, in part, Ford’s motion to dismiss class warranty claims arising from a defect in certain EcoBoost engines. They have sufficiently pleaded certain express warranty and implied warranty claims, and claims under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act and California Unfair Competition Law, among others.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Drozd, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1796, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Consumer Law, Warranty, Class Action
J. Chang grants a Ford customer’s motion to consolidate his proposed consumer class action with another similar suit, but also grants Ford’s motion to transfer this case to the Eastern District of Michigan. The customer alleges Ford knowingly sold vehicles with faulty backup cameras, and that even following a recall, his own vehicle’s camera remained unrepaired. The court finds this case and another are sufficiently similar to warrant consolidation, but that Michigan, as the district where the cameras were manufactured, is the more appropriate venue.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Chang, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv14027, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Venue, Class Action
J. Myers partially grants an automated laboratory systems manufacturer’s motion to dismiss allegations of breach of implied warranty and other claims brought by a genetic testing laboratory. Specifically, the laboratory purchased a product called the DreamPrep unit and claims that the unit was defective. Because the manufacturer had a disclaimer written into its warranty, the laboratory’s argument fails under state law. However, the remaining claims, including negligent misrepresentation and negligent manufacturing defect, survive.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Myers, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv305, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Warranty
J. Russell grants, in part, a manufacturer’s motion to dismiss this products liability, tort, and contract dispute brought by several solar companies. The solar companies request punitive damages and allege the manufacturer sold defective electric power safety cutoff devices, which overheated and failed in multiple projects, creating a high risk of fire and electrocution. The solar companies failed to allege they had a fiduciary or confidential relationship nor that the manufacturer mislead partial or fragmentary statements. Therefore, the fraudulent concealment is dismissed, and the manufacturer must answer the amended complaint. The court will deny the request punitive damages because the burden at this stage has been met on clear and convincing evidence.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Russell, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1606, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Civil Procedure, Negligence, Product Liability
J. Kendall partially grants a food company’s motion to dismiss a consumer fraud class action. A class of consumers sued the food company after they bought its “Certified Sustainably Sourced” fish products, only to discover that the company employed a non-ecofriendly “pelagic trawl” fishing method that indiscriminately captures everything in the path of a net the size of two football fields. The court will allow the class’s fraud and state-level claims to move forward, but denies their motion for an injunction against the company’s unsustainable fishing practices. The court argues that because the class is now aware the company’s fish is unsustainably sourced, “any future harm is too speculative to support standing for injunctive relief.”
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kendall, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1298, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Environment, Fraud, Class Action
J. Jenkins partially grants the defendant isobutane manufacturer’s motion to dismiss a pharmaceutical company’s breach of contract, breach of warranty, negligence and product liability claims. The isobutane manufacturer produces a component used in the pharma company’s antifungal spray, and now the pharma company accuses the manufacturer of contaminating that component with benzene. The court allows most of the pharma company’s claims to stand but dismisses its negligence and strict liability claims, finding they are barred by the economic loss doctrine.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Jenkins, Filed On: March 24, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv4391, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Warranty, Contract
J. Vascura grants the shingle manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the homeowners have produced no expert testimony or other evidence to support their claim the shingles installed at their home were defective. Rather, the majority of their claims relate to the improper installation of the shingles by the roofing company; therefore, the manufacturer cannot be held liable.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Vascura, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv3231, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Evidence, Product Liability, Contract
J. Walter grants a request by a Texas fabricating and manufacturing company to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds claims arising from a contract product liability suit brought against a Louisiana design business by a fiberglass factory, also located in Texas. The Louisiana company alleges the fabricator is responsible for making parts of two 111-feet ventilation stacks for the fiberglass factory, one of which blew over from about 35-feet above ground level, damaging the plant below. The only performance of the contract in Louisiana was done by the design company located in Shreveport. The Texas-based fabrication plant did not purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting business within Louisiana or invoke the benefits and protections of Louisiana law. Therefore, the Louisiana court does not have jurisdiction over the Texas stack-builder.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Walter, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv5837, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Jurisdiction, Contract
J. Hittner grants a boat seller's motion for summary judgment in a dispute arising from the purchase of a boat that subsequently had fuel system issues. The buyer's contract, negligent misrepresentation, fraud and breach of warranty claims fail, as the parties' sales agreement was unambiguously as-is and there is no evidence the seller made a representation of the boat's fuel tank.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Hittner, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv4510, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Warranty, Contract
J. Stadtmueller partially grants summary judgment to the trucking company in a lawsuit involving a disputed warranty claim from an insurance company on behalf of an insured whose driver was driving a truck manufactured and serviced by the company when he crashed into a highway median, which he and the company claim was caused by the truck's defective power steering. The insurance company's claim of breach of implied warranties fails and is dismissed with prejudice, in part because the disclaimer language regarding implied warranties in the relevant warranty agreement is conspicuous enough, though it is "a close case." The insurance company's breach of express warranty claim survives and will move forward to trial for a jury to decide whether the crash was caused by defective power steering or the driver's own fault.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv219, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Warranty, Contract
J. Hardy dismisses a home builder’s breach of contract and negligence claims against the lumber company that provided moist, and eventually moldy, materials for the builder's personal house. The homeowner lacks standing because the contract was with his company, which ultimately owns the house, not the home builder as an individual.
Court: USDC Western District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Hardy, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1763, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Negligence, Product Liability, Contract
J. Coughenour denies the technology company summary judgment for its warranty claim in its lawsuit alleging that the trading company produced and sold chicken with bones instead of the agreed-upon boneless chicken, putting customer safety at risk. The technology company and the trading company offer conflicting evidence on whether the product qualifies as "breast trim," and a reasonable jury could believe either argument.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Coughenour, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv296, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Product Liability, Warranty, Contract
J. Guzman denies, in part, several companies' motions to dismiss claims filed against them through a class action for allegedly contaminating groundwater wells with chemicals. The residents sufficiently allege three of the companies submitted false environmental compliance certifications and did so knowingly, as a way to save money.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Guzman, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv40089, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Environment, Water, Class Action