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.

Consumer Law
Automobile Sale
Vehicle Defects

Richard Cochran, et al. v. Volvo Group North America LLC

Published: Nov. 30, 2013 | Result Date: Oct. 29, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1:11-cv-00927 Bench Decision –  Class Certification Denied

Court

USDC North Carolina


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Cynthia B. Chapman

John Jones

G. Christopher Olson

Cory S. Fein
(Cory Fein Law Firm)

Michael A. Caddell
(Caddell & Chapman)


Defendant

Richard J. Keshian

Chad Hansen


Facts

Richard Cochran and several other consumers filed a putative class action against Volvo Group North America LLC alleging design defects affecting Volvo trucks with Volvo D13 and D16 engines. Plaintiffs sought to certify the class action.

Plaintiffs had previously filed a request for a nationwide class to be certified and was denied. Plaintiffs sought leave to file a second motion to certify statewide classes, where each would have a class representative from that state. Plaintiff brought this second motion to certify a nationwide class and suggested that North Carolina law be applied, and that if the court found there were any conflicts with the laws of the other states, a separate subclass could be created for the residents of those states.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that the affected truck engines had a common defect that led to repeated breakdowns and malfunctions. Plaintiffs also contended that Volvo dealerships were unable to adequately repair the engines, causing them significant lost income. It caused other plaintiffs excessive repair expenses for those whose warranties have run out. Plaintiffs also contended that defendants were aware of the defects, but were unable to or refused to repair it.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant denied all allegations.

Result

The court denied the second motion for class certification.


#111829

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

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390