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
Unfair Business Practices
Fraud

Heather Gutierrez, Connie Kaupa v. Honda North America Inc., American Honda Motor Co Inc.

Published: Dec. 13, 2014 | Result Date: Feb. 13, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5:09-cv-01517-JZ-OP Settlement –  Reimbursement

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jordan S. Esensten
(Esensten Law)

Brian D. Chase
(Bisnar Chase LLP)

Alfredo Torrijos
(Arias, Sanguinetti, Wang & Torrijos LLP)

Mike Arias
(Arias Sanguinetti Wang & Team LLP)


Defendant

Derek S. Whitefield
(Dykema Gossett PLLC)

Kathleen P. Lally
(Latham & Watkins LLP)

Terri Reiskin

Mark Mester


Facts

Heather Gutierrez and Connie Kaupa filed a class action against American Honda Motor Co. Inc.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs sued defendants on behalf of others who currently owned or leased a Honda vehicle equipped with factory installed side air bag system or who previously owned or leased a vehicle that experienced an inadvertent deployment of the side airbag system.

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants had vehicles that were equipped with a side airbag system. Plaintiffs alleged that the side air bag system was defective that caused inadvertent or spontaneous deployment while the vehicle is being driven. Plaintiffs claimed that such spontaneous and inadvertent deployment created a dangerous condition. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants had been aware of the defects since 2009, but failed to warn consumers about it. Moreover, plaintiffs also accused defendants of issuing misleading statements about the dangerous defect, and refused to reimburse consumers whose vehicles experienced such deployment.

Plaintiffs asserted claims for unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices and unfair and deceptive business practices under the California Business and Professions Code.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied the allegations, and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Result

The parties reached a settlement, under which, Honda agreed to reimburse class members of out-of-pocket expenses incurred to repair a spontaneous or inadvertent deployment. Honda also agreed to repair or replace vehicles that experienced a "reimbursable deployment" within two years of the effective date of the settlement, free of charge.


#90905

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

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