Samsung Washing Machine Class Action Lawsuit Dismissed

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

In a consolidated class action lawsuit accusing Samsung Electronics America Inc. of selling faulty front-loading washing machines, a New Jersey federal judge Wednesday dismissed the case against the company, ruling against the plaintiffs on a number of fronts.

The plaintiffs allege in the class action lawsuit that Samsung’s front-loading washing machines were designed and manufactured with serious defects that caused the accumulation of mold and mildew, and a “moldy or mildewy odor that permeates the Washing Machine and clothes,” rendering them unusable for the purposes for which they were advertised and sold, and that the company didn’t disclose the defects.

Plaintiffs Jeanne Spera of New Jersey and Bethany Mizell of Missouri argued together that Samsung made express representations about the quality of its washing machines, making breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty claims, as well as violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act.

The Samsung washing machine class action lawsuit filed by Spera also alleged that Samsung failed to disclose the design defects and mold problems or the extraordinary maintenance that is required to combat the accumulation of mold, touting them as Energy Star appliances, which led to an unjust enrichment claim. The Samsung class action lawsuit had been consolidated with a claim from plaintiffs Chad and Jessica Chowning of Colorado, nearly identical to the Spera complaint but basing its state law violations on the Colorado Consumer Protection Act.

One of the arguments on which Samsung based its motioned to dismiss the Samsung washer class action lawsuit was the conflict between the state laws in question, or “choice of law.” Judge William J. Martini wrote in his April 2decision, “[t]he Court finds that there is a sufficient factual basis to make a choice-of-law determination because the allegations of the Complaints provide the Court with adequate information regarding each contact it must weigh under New Jersey’s ‘most significant relationship’ test.”

Judge Martini went on to determine that, because of actual conflicts between New Jersey, Missouri, and Colorado law, a second test was required to determine whether the state claims should be dismissed; this one came down to whether or not the alleged fraud took place in the states in question. The acts were determined to have taken place at the New Jersey headquarters of Samsung, which was not a significant relationship to either the Missouri or the Colorado case, thereby dismissing the Samsung washing machine class action lawsuits filed by Mizell and Chowning.

With regard to the New Jersey claim, Judge Martini found that Spera had failed to make a detailed attempt to “quantify the difference in value between the promised product and the actual product received,” so he dismissed Spera’s New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act claim without prejudice.

On another aspect of the fraud claims, Judge Martini wrote the “plaintiff must plead a specific omission of a material fact and the defendant’s knowledge of it” in order to substantiate the claim, and found that “the Complaints to lack specific facts supporting Samsung’s knowledge of the alleged defect,” not pointing to “a specific time at which Samsung allegedly became aware of the purported defect.” These were therefore all dismissed without prejudice.

The breach of express warranty claims were all considered under New Jersey law, and were dismissed because it was not clear whether the customer complaints were made within the one-year warranty period. A disclaimer in the warranty led to a further dismissal of the breach of implied warranty of merchantability claims.

The unjust enrichment claims were also considered under New Jersey law, which states, “When an individual purchases a consumer product from a third-party store and not the manufacturer, the purchaser has not conferred a benefit directly to the manufacturer such that the manufacturer could be found to have been unjustly enriched.” Because none of the plaintiffs purchased their machines directly from the manufacturer, this claim was dismissed, as well.

Chad and Jessica Chowning are represented by James E. Cecchi of Carella Byrne Cecchi Olstein Brody & Agnello PC. Jeanne Spera and Bethany Mizell are represented by Richard J. Burke, Jeffrey A. Leon and Julie D. Miller of Complex Litigation Group LLC and Jonathan Shub and Scott Alan George of Seeger Weiss LLP.

The consolidated Samsung Washing Machine Class Action Lawsuit is In re: Samsung Front Loading Washer Mold Litigation, Case No. 2:12-cv-05412, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.