Blog

Medical Devices

view all

Auto Accidents

view all

Labor Law

view all

FDA and Prescription Drugs

view all

Products Liability

view all

Medical Malpractice

view all

Wrongful Death

view all

Personal Injury

view all

Trasylol

view all

General

view all

News

view all

Library

FDA and Prescription Drugs

Recruiting

Newsletter

General


Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP Blog

Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP Blog
Blog Category:
8/21/2008
Paul Napoli
Comments (0)

Class Action Product Liability Case Against DaimlerChrysler Failed

The class action product liability case against DaimlerChrysler was put to rest as the judge sided with the defendant because it was proven that the plaintiffs did not incur problems with head gaskets until after warranty expired. The delayed filing of the class action suit also played a part in the failure of the suit because the complaint was filed after the statue of limitations had run out. The class action suit had alleged that the Neon, manufactured by Dodge, was built with defective head gaskets. The class action case’s complaint sited that DaimlerChrysler broke their duty of express and implied warranties, as well as committing fraud. However, the judge did not find this to be true and found that the plaintiff’s Dodge Neon was no longer under warranty when it began experiencing problems.


In dealings like these not only was the vehicle no longer under warranty, but the statue of limitations was also expired. A big issue for the defense was that the vehicle’s head gasket had already lived through its guaranteed warranty of 3 years or 36,000 thousand miles. What was also said was that upon being sold, the Dodge Neon’s head gaskets were already defective because they were not meant to last forever. Therefore once the head gasket had lived past its warranty without any problems, it was deemed not liable. In a products liability case it is necessary to prove that a duty of care was established and one of the parties breached that contract. In this case Dodge Neon had a duty of care for as long as the warranty was upheld


This instance of product liability is something that can appear to be very controversial because of the commitment and responsibility of the individual dealerships. When plaintiffs go above and beyond a reasonable claim, the dealership will fight it. However, if the claim is semi reasonable the dealership might settle the suit just to stay in good standings with their consumers. In businesses that sell products and services that have fierce competition, reputation is everything. There having a negative product liability suit against a dealership is something that is looked very downed upon. DaimlerChrysler did the right thing in fighting for the reputation of their business because they filled all obligations and contracts.


Products Liability cases can be hard to prove due to the fact that manufacturers must only show that "ordinary care under the circumstances" was applied to avoid liability for negligence. It is here where an experience team of lawyers can help you can determine how you can proceed with your case. Napoli Bern Ripka has the experience in finding the evidence necessary to show the contrary. Napoli Bern Ripka is a premiere personal injury firm having over 60 years of experience combined. Paul J Napoli and Marc J Bern are Super Lawyers, Members of Law Dragon which represent top performing lawyers. They have access to the top resources needed to get the settlement you deserve, not what is offered.

Comments

There are no comments.

Post a comment

Post a Comment to "Class Action Product Liability Case Against DaimlerChrysler Failed"

To reply to this message, enter your reply in the box labeled "Message", enter your username and password, and hit "Post Message."

Username:

Password:

Register for an account

Message: