The automotive industry frequently confronts class action litigation. The complexity of product design, manufacturing and warnings issues, coupled with broad marketing and sales programs, provides fertile ground for potentially millions of consumers to seek class relief for alleged vehicle defects and deceptive trade practices.
Class certification jurisprudence is evolving quickly, and with it courts have grappled with important issues in several recent motor vehicle decisions. The rigorous analysis advanced by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In re Hydrogen Peroxide , 552 F.3d 305 (3d Cir. 2008), and endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes , 131 S. Ct. 2541, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011), and the increased focus by federal courts on the sufficiency of pleadings, continues to drive those developments in automotive class actions. As part of that increased scrutiny, courts also are conducting more rigorous reviews of expert opinions in automobile cases, which necessarily involve the litigation of complex technical, advertising and financial damages issues.
