The automotive industry frequently confronts class action litigation. The complexity of product design, manufacturing and warnings issues, coupled with broad marketing and sales programs, provides fertile ground for potentially millions of consumers to seek class relief for alleged vehicle defects and deceptive trade practices.
Class certification jurisprudence is evolving quickly, and with it courts have grappled with important issues in several recent motor vehicle decisions. The rigorous analysis advanced by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In re Hydrogen Peroxide , 552 F.3d 305 (3d Cir. 2008), and endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes , 131 S. Ct. 2541, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011), and the increased focus by federal courts on the sufficiency of pleadings, continues to drive those developments in automotive class actions. As part of that increased scrutiny, courts also are conducting more rigorous reviews of expert opinions in automobile cases, which necessarily involve the litigation of complex technical, advertising and financial damages issues.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
