. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.

ARTICLE ID 8652

Lemon law claim - Violation of federal Magnuson Moss Act - Alleged breach of contract - Claimed defective front end suspension system of ________ Dodge Grand Caravan.

Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania

The plaintiff claimed the defendant car manufacturer violated Pennsylvania’s Lemon law, the federal Magnuson Moss Act and the sales contract by selling a ________ Dodge Grand Caravan with a defective front end suspension system. The defendant maintained the plaintiff struck a pothole or other object causing a front end misalignment which was not covered under the vehicle’s warrantee.

The plaintiff testified he purchased a new ________ Dodge Grand Caravan for $________ from the defendant car dealership, an agent of the defendant manufacturer, on June 15, ________. Between the date of purchase and May 8, ________, the plaintiff testified he returned the vehicle to the dealership 13 times with complaints of a front end suspension problem. The plaintiff testified he experienced serious vibrations at speeds over 65 mph and the vehicle veered into another lane if the plaintiff took his hands off the steering wheel for a brief moment.

The plaintiff testified that, each time he bought the vehicle in to the dealership for repairs the dealership attempted to correct p 7 3 the front end suspension problem. Following correction, the car would function property for a short time and then the front end alignment problems would recur, according to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff argued that the defendant would not have attempted to repair the car 13 times under warrantee unless it believed the problems resulted from a defect in the vehicle. The plaintiff’s expert auto mechanic testified the vehicle was unsafe to drive and sustained a diminution in value of $________.

@TITLEHD = DEFENDANTS’ CONTENTIONS The defendant’s district manager testified the plaintiff brought the car in question in with ________ miles on it on July 2, ________, complaining of alignment problems, which were confirmed with diagnostic testing.

The defendant’s district manager testified he observed a gash in the right front tire of the plaintiff’s vehicle and the rim of the wheel was bent. The tire was subsequently discarded. The defendant contended the plaintiff struck a pothole causing the misalignment and damaging the vehicle’s frame. The defendant maintained the plaintiff’s negligence in striking a pothole or other object was not covered under the vehicle’s warrantee.

The jury found for the defendant.

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.


Your cart is empty
Let Our expert Researchers Do The Searching For You! Pro Search Service