It can be a massive disappointment to discover you bought a lemon. Fortunately, lemon laws safeguard consumers from being stuck with a defective car. These regulations differ from state to state. But they typically offer consumers substantial legal options. You might need to look at some examples of lemon law cases that may apply to your broken car.
After you read this article, you will have practical advice to consider by examining legal precedents. If you are ready to do something about your defective vehicle, you need the details in this article. Complete a practical examination of what may happen and schedule a consultation to discuss your options today.
Lemon Law Cases That May Apply to Your Broken Car
Soule v. General Motors Corp.
Soule v. General Motors Corp. was a product liability case filed against General Motors. Terri Soule, the plaintiff, suffered injuries in a car accident she claimed happened due to a defect.
Specifically, Soule alleged the steering system was prone to sudden and unexpected failures. As a result, she lost control of the vehicle and crashed. The case went to trial, and the jury awarded her significant damages.
However, the Supreme Court of California later overturned the verdict. They held that the plaintiff had failed to present sufficient evidence. The court also established the “risk-benefit” test for evaluating product defects. This legal doctrine considers whether the risks associated with a product outweigh its benefits.
The case was significant in establishing the risk-benefit test as a standard for evaluating product defects. Furthermore, it highlighted the importance of providing sufficient evidence to support causation in these cases.
How Soule v. General Motors Corp. May Affect Your Lawsuit
Proving that a design flaw caused your injuries was already a high bar to clear. But this milestone lawsuit created an even more stringent precedent for what the courts accept as evidence. Hence its importance as one of many lemon law cases that may apply to your broken car.
Regardless, this setback is not the end of the proverbial road. Hiring a personal injury attorney with experience in these situations will be a considerable asset. They will cater their investigations and resources toward finding details that meet this higher standard.
Baker v. Volkswagen of America
Baker v. Volkswagen of America was a class-action lawsuit that claimed certain vehicles had a dangerous defect. The group of plaintiffs claimed defective automatic transmissions caused sudden and unintended acceleration.
The primary allegation was that VW knew about the defect but failed to warn consumers. Ultimately, the case settled out of court. The manufacturer agreed to pay up to $100 million in compensation to affected consumers.
VW also agreed to provide free inspections and repairs as part of the settlement. Moreover, they established a fund for future fixes and consumer education. The case was significant because it highlighted the importance of consumer safety and holding automakers accountable.
How Baker v. Volkswagen of America May Affect Your Lawsuit
This litigation shows that it is not impossible to prove intent. Even a massive corporation like Volkswagen of America cannot hide every detail of its actions. However, it takes a highly-competent legal team with deep contacts to get the job done.
It is also notable that VW settled instead of going through a costly trial. This is really what makes it one of many lemon law cases that may apply to your broken car. Many organizations take this route because they do not want to risk an uncertain outcome under product liability laws. If your personal injury lawyer has enough proof, the chances are good that they will secure damages out of court.
Kimmel v. Toyota Motor Corp.
Kimmel v. Toyota Motor Corp. was a lawsuit that claimed certain Toyota vehicles had a sudden unintended acceleration (SUA) defect. The plaintiffs alleged that Toyota knew about the danger and failed to take action.
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed the case. They asserted that the plaintiffs failed to provide enough evidence to support their claims. The court also said that Toyota had provided adequate warning to consumers about the potential for SUA. Therefore, the claims made by the plaintiffs had preemptions under federal law.
However, the case was significant in bringing attention to the issue of SUA in Toyota vehicles. It also led to further investigations and recalls by the company.
How Kimmel v. Toyota May Affect Your Lawsuit
According to the decision in this case, warnings from the manufacturer can be enough to protect them. Consequently, it should not be a surprise that companies get aggressive about informing consumers of recalls.
The fallout has had a noteworthy impact on how lemon law attorneys approach litigation. If your vehicle has well-known issues, they may have to lean on different strategies. For instance, they may contact former or current employees who have evidence their employer ignored problems.
Schedule a Consultation With a Lemon Law Lawyer
These cases represent milestone legal precedents that may apply to your lawsuit. However, there are many more details to consider that require a lemon law attorney. Only a highly-qualified lawyer can give you the clarity you need to take immediate civil action.
Do not allow the manufacturer or dealership to get away with selling a broken vehicle. Request legal help through our website or call (866) 345-6784 to schedule an appointment with a licensed attorney.
