This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Feb. 9, 2022

Baird v. Samsung Electronics America Inc.

See more on Baird v. Samsung Electronics America Inc.

CLASS ACTION - BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, FRAUD

Class Action - Breach Of Express Warranty, Unjust Enrichment, Fraud

Northern District

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White

Defense Attorneys: Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Llp And Affiliates, Lance A. Etcheverry, Julia M. Nahigian, Mayra T. Aguilera, Michael C. Minahan, E. Richard Schwartz (Former Skadden Attorney), Kevin J. Minnick (Now With Spertus Landes & Umhofer Llp); Browne George Ross O'brien Annaguey & Ellis Llp, Richard A. Schwartz

Plaintiffs Attorneys: Ongaro Pc, David R. Ongaro; Law Offices Of Jacob Karczewski Pllc, Jacob L. Karczewski


Lance A. Etcheverry

Persistence paid for the defense team at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates. In a potential nationwide class action by late-model smart TV owners who complained their new Samsung TVs could not connect to YouTube, it looked like the plaintiffs were on a roll.

A federal appellate panel reversed an earlier dismissal, letting the plaintiffs again seek to persuade U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White of Oakland to let the case go forward. "Judge White had issued a wholesale dismissal on the first go-round," said Skadden's lead defense lawyer, Lance A. Etcheverry. "One critical part of the 9th Circuit's opinion in reversing was an analysis of the plaintiffs' novel approach to pleading around the expired warranty."

He explained that the plaintiffs' theory was an attempt to sidestep the warranty by pleading the case as a breach of contract claim--seeking to avoid having to identify any affirmation of fact or promise of lifetime access to YouTube. By alleging that the television sets stopped accessing YouTube on a specific date, the plaintiffs were essentially conceding that the sets did access YouTube during the warranty period, Etcheverry added.

In January 2021 White again dismissed all causes of action. Baird v. Samsung Electronics America Inc., 4:17-cv-06407 (N.D. Cal., filed Nov. 2, 2017).

"They knew they had a problem on warranty, so in trying to confront that weakness they tried to make the timing as ambiguous as possible, but Judge White saw through that," Etcheverry said.

Lead plaintiff's lawyer David R. Ongaro of Ongaro PC declined to comment on any aspect of the case. Skadden said that settlement talks are in progress with another circuit appeal awaiting if they fail.

Etcheverry said the case demonstrates the importance of flexibility in defense strategy when an appellate panel gives guidance in an opinion. The circuit opinion signaled that White should reconsider and fully address some of the plaintiffs' arguments--causing the Skadden team to adjust its approach and prioritize certain lines of reasoning that would counter claims in the new dismissal motion.

"Samsung is a third party that can't control what YouTube does," he summed up part of the new approach. "We used the analogy of a TV with a standard electrical plug--the maker couldn't represent that that plug would be compatible with every socket out there."

- John Roemer

Julia M. Nahigian
Mayra T. Aguilera
Michael C. Minahan
#366061

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com