Mazda Clutch Defect Class Action Lawsuit Trimmed

A class action lawsuit alleging certain Mazda automobiles have defective clutches has been trimmed by a California federal judge.

Lead plaintiffs claimed in their class action lawsuit that the clutches in Mazda 3 cars contain a defective release assembly.

This creates a risk for premature clutch failure and poses a significant safety risk to the driver and passengers when suddenly and without warning, the vehicle’s engine is unable to provide power to the transmission and becomes inoperable, according to the class action lawsuit.

Mazda said the class action claims should be trimmed, arguing that the plaintiffs have brought forth several allegations that should be dealt with on an individual basis.

Additionally, Mazda contends that premature clutch failure can occur through a number of causes, not just the alleged clutch defect.

U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney ruled in favor of Mazda, but will allow the plaintiffs to amend their class action claims.

Judge Chesney cut plaintiffs’ claims that Mazda violated Florida and Connecticut consumer protection statutes as well as breach of express and written warranty allegations.

The judge said in her order that these claims were lacking necessary facts, but she will allow the plaintiffs to provide supporting facts because of the magnitude of the class action.

The plaintiffs’ implied warranty claims and allegations that Mazda violated California’s Song-Beverly Act and Secret Warranty Law were trimmed without an opportunity to amend.

The judge pointed out that the warranty claims lacked privity and were time-barred. Additionally, the claims based on California law could not be applied to non-Californians.

“The court acknowledges district courts have disagreed as to whether California recognizes a third-party beneficiary exception to the privity requirement,” said the judge in her order. “Having reviewed the relevant available authority, the court is persuaded by the reasoning of those cases that have declined to extend the list of exceptions to encompass asserted third-party beneficiaries.”

A number of the class action lawsuit’s claims survived, however, including one California resident’s claim under the California Song-Beverly Act. Additionally, claims brought under Pennsylvania’s consumer protection statute alleged by two Pennsylvania residents was retained.

Judge Chesney didn’t come to a decision regarding Mazda’s argument that the plaintiffs who are not California residents should not be able to make claims for California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act because their state’s law should apply.

“The sole remaining issue is the whether there are ‘material differences’ between California law and the laws of the states in which the transactions took place,” said the judge in her order, noting that “this is not a case in which further development of the factual record is reasonably likely to materially impact the choice of law determination.”

The plaintiffs are represented by Richard D. McCune, David C. Wright, Joseph G. Sauder and Matthew D. Schelkopf of McCuneWright LLP and Bryan Clobes and Daniel Herrera of Cafferty Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel LLP.

The Mazda Clutch Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Gonzalez, et al. v. Mazda Motor Corp., et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-02087, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.