Michael L. Mallow

Michael L. Mallow, a managing partner at Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., focuses his work on class action and complex litigation matters, including economic product defects, unfair competition, false and deceptive advertising, business torts, privacy, entertainment and intellectual property.

He played a leading role in a significant case in the realm of auto-class action litigation. The plaintiffs alleged that Mazda sold certain vehicles with defective internal water pumps, fully aware of these defects but failing to disclose them to the buyers. Sonneveldt v. Mazda Motor Corp., 8:19-cv-01298 (C.D. Cal. filed June 28, 2019).

This litigation underwent extensive discovery, leading to the court’s initial decision to certify a broad class based on the plaintiffs’ technical expert’s opinions. However, in a significant twist, the court later granted Mazda’s motion for summary judgment. This crucial decision was anchored on the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ technical expert, who was found not to meet the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 702 requirements, particularly in light of the plaintiffs’ comparative performance defect theory. The case is currently on appeal to the 9th Circuit and is fully briefed. Oral argument is anticipated for some time in 2024.

“The case is quite significant in auto class action litigation because plaintiffs will often argue a vehicle component is defective because it fails more often than comparable components in other vehicles, but will not offer comparative data or testing to substantiate the defect allegation,” Mallow said. “The court’s ruling in Sonneveldt establishes that this failure can be case dispositive.

Mallow highlighted significant challenges faced in this litigation, noting the initial certification of a broad class and the court’s initial denial of Mazda’s motion to exclude the plaintiffs’ technical expert during the class certification stage. This initial phase set the stage for the subsequent pivotal court decisions.

Moreover, Mallow pointed out emerging trends in the field of consumer class actions.

“Consistent with the court’s ruling in Sonneveldt, there seems to be a slight increase in courts granting class certification in consumer class actions,” he said. “In the past, it was generally believed that if a case is certified, it will settle. Recently, however, I think there is a trend among defendant companies to push certified class actions to trial (or to dispositive motions) without contemplating an immediate settlement post certification. I suspect over the next couple of years there will be a meaningful uptick in class action trials as a result of this trend.”