Suzuki Electric Lighting Defect Class Action Lawsuit Dismissed

Last week, a class action lawsuit alleging that defects in the electric lighting concealed by Suzuki Motor of America Inc. caused compact cars to malfunction was dismissed by an Oklahoma federal judge.

In the class action lawsuit filed last October, lead plaintiff Jason Dinwiddie alleged that a defect in his 2007 Forenza caused the electric lighting to malfunction and eventually a car fire last summer. He alleged that the engine maker of his car, Suzuki, had known of the defect since 2007 and knew that the defect caused vehicle fires. American Suzuki Motor Corp., the company that manufactured the motor, had since gone through bankruptcy.

In its motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit, Suzuki argued that although it acquired assets from American Suzuki Motor Corp. in 2013, the boat and motorcycle company did not take on all of the liabilities of American Suzuki. The defendant Suzuki also pointed out in its motion that when it acquired recall responsibilities under the asset purchase agreement in 2013, it issued a voluntary recall when it discovered the potential issues in 2014, with the help of the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.

U.S. District Court Judge Lee R. West agreed with Suzuki, pointing out that although American Suzuki had been enriched by the alleged defect, that enrichment had not been passed on in the asset purchase agreement as a result of the bankruptcy proceedings.

Judge West also determined that an exemption to Oklahoma state law applied as well. “To establish an [Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act] claim, a plaintiff must show (1) that the defendant engaged in an ‘unlawful practice’ … ‘(2) that the challenged practice occurred in the course of [the] defendant’s business; (3) that the plaintiff, as a consumer, suffered an injury in fact; and (4) that the challenged practice caused the plaintiff’s injury.’”

“[The Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act], however, exempts from its purview any ‘actions or transactions regulated under laws administered by … any … regulatory body of the United States,” Judge West pointed out in his order dismissing the Suzuki class action lawsuit. “It is undisputed in this case that Suzuki Motor was action under [the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration]’s supervision and regulatory authority during the recall process,” the judge continued, dismissing the claim.

Judge West similarly dismissed the class action lawsuit claims that Suzuki violated state consumer protection laws when it allegedly mishandled a recall of the defective motor. Judge West found that under the terms of the bankruptcy agreement, Suzuki is only now liable for any apparent lemon law violations of its predecessor.

“That lemon laws in general may be geared toward consumer protection does not alter the express definition of that term in the [asset purchase agreement],” said Judge West in his order dismissing the Suzuki class action lawsuit. “Accordingly, Suzuki Motor did not assume liability for any [Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act] violation and is entitled to dismissal of this claim,” he concluded.

Dinwiddie is represented by Blake Sonne of Sonne Law Firm PLC.

The Suzuki Electric Lighting Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Dinwiddie, et al. v. Suzuki Motor of America Inc., Case No. 5:14-cv-01127, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.