District Judge Andre Birotte, Jr. handed Ford Motor Co. another favorable ruling in a test case of the DPS6 powershift transmission MDL at the Central District of California.
Birotte granted Ford summary judgment March 29, concluding that the remaining claims in plaintiff Jeff Hobart's case were barred by the statute of limitations.
Hobart, represented by Knight Law Group attorney Steven Mikhov of Los Angeles and Bryan Altman, also of Los Angeles, had conceded judgment on his Song-Beverly Act claim for breach of implied warranty, and on his claims for fraud by intentional and negligent misrepresentation, but he opposed Ford's motion as to his Song-Beverly Act claim for breach of express warranty, and his fraudulent omission claim.
Enacted in 1970, the Song-Beverly Act, known as the state's "lemon law," provides buyers with legal recourse related to warranted goods. With some success, Ford has been fighting lemon lawsuits alleging power shift transmissions in certain Fiesta and Focus models are prone to delayed acceleration and downshifting and that some vehicles have crashed.
In total, tens of thousands of complaints have been filed against the auto industry in California claiming violation of Song-Beverly. Ford has been hit with the most lemon law suits with more than 9,000 since 2015.
The Knight Law Group and Altman represent many of those claimants.
Oral arguments in Hobart were held March 12.
According to background in the ruling, Hobart traded in his allegedly defective 2011 Ford Fiesta on April 9, 2013, and did not file a lawsuit until Feb. 5, 2018.
Birotte wrote that Hobart filed his lawsuit well after the three-year statute of limitations on his fraud claim expired, and after a four-year statute on his express warranty claim had expired.
He was not persuaded by Hobart's argument.
"Plaintiff argues that pursuant to American Pipe and Const. Co. v. Utah, the limitations period was tolled by the class action lawsuit Klipfel v. Ford Motor Co., filed in California Superior Court on February 20, 2015," Birotte wrote.
"Plaintiff’s argument is unavailing."
Birotte noted that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that the “rule of American Pipe—which allows tolling within the federal court system in federal question class actions—does not mandate cross-jurisdictional tolling as a matter of state procedure."
He further wrote that Hobart relied on another class action—Klipfel—to toll his limitations period pursuant to American Pipe, and argued that Klipfel does not implicate cross jurisdictional tolling because it was originally filed in state court.
Ford had responded that Klipfel could not support Hobart's claims for many reasons, including that the case was removed to federal court.
"...Even if American Pipe tolling were available through Klipfel, and it could toll enough time, Plaintiff’s claims would still not be saved because they were not pled in Klipfel," Birotte wrote. "The tolling rule does not ‘leave a plaintiff free to raise different or peripheral claims following denial of class status.'"
In his order, Birotte also ruled that Hobart's fraud claim also was barred by the economic loss rule, which does not allow for economic damage recovery if there is no physical harm - personal injury or property damage.
"The Court previously held in a different case in this MDL (Altamirano-Torres) that the economic loss rule barred a fraudulent omission claim indistinguishable from the claim herein," Birotte wrote. "The Court sees no reason to depart from that analysis, and incorporates it herein by reference."
Birotte has found in favor of Ford in several cases over the past year.
In June 2020, he denied an exorbitant fee request by Knight Law
In August 2020, he reversed a $23,155 plaintiff's jury verdict in a trial he presided over in December 2019.