California court partially grants Ford summary judgment in cases over allegedly defective trucks

By Gabriel Neves | Nov 2, 2018

LOS ANGELES (Legal Newsline) – The owners of allegedly defective Ford F-350 pickup trucks partially lost their appeals in court as it decided for partial summary judgment in favor of the auto manufacturer.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Guilford, on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, issued a seven-page ruling on Sep. 10 on the lawsuits filed by Leonor Arechiga, et al. and Steven Campos, et al. against Ford Motor Co. partially granting Ford's motion for summary judgment in both cases.

The Arechiga and Campos plaintiffs filed their suits after buying F-350s in 2005 over allegations the trucks had issues involving their 6-liter engines and that Ford failed to provide adequate repair. Also, both sets of plaintiffs claimed that Ford made several misrepresentations before and after their purchases of the trucks.

As stated in the ruling, the Arechiga and Campos suits state that Ford committed "(1) fraud in the inducement through intentional misrepresentation; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) fraud in the inducement through concealment; (4) fraud in the performance of a contract through intentional misrepresentation; (5) violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act; and (6) violation of the California Song-Beverly Act."

In regards to the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) allegations, Guilford pointed that the plaintiffs in Arechiga "provide almost no argument or evidence suggesting that Ford’s promise to repurchase their vehicle was somehow insufficient under the CLRA’s cure provision." The court partially granted summary judgment to Ford on this claim for both cases.

Citing the other issue in the Campos case, statute of limitations, Guilford denied Ford's motion for summary judgment based on that claim, stating that "discovery in the Campos case isn’t set to close until Oct. 29, 2018," with more discovery "necessary" to resolve that issue.

On the same issue, but in the Arechiga case, Guilford stated that "where a party opposing summary judgment 'shows by affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition,' the court may deny the motion for summary judgment."

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California case number 8:17-cv-01915-AG-DFM

Want to get notified whenever we write about any of these organizations ?

Sign-up Next time we write about any of these organizations, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Ford Motor Company U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

More News

The Record Network