Toshiba Can’t Dodge Laptop Cracked Screen Class Action Lawsuit

Toshiba Can’t Dodge Laptop Cracked Screen Class Action Lawsuit

By Anne Bucher

A California federal judge has denied Toshiba America Information Systems Inc.’s request to dismiss a class action lawsuit accusing the company of failing to honor a warranty on laptop screens that were prone to cracking.

In his class action lawsuit, plaintiff Thomas Hardy alleged that the screen on his Toshiba Portege Z835 Ultrabook developed a crack several months after he purchased the laptop. Even though the laptop was still under warranty, Toshiba allegedly refused to cover the damage. After several attempts to resolve the issue with Toshiba, Hardy decided to take legal action.

In April, Hardy filed the Toshiba laptop class action lawsuit on behalf of all consumers who had purchased various Toshiba Portege laptops. He alleges violations of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law and breach of warranty.

On September 25, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney refused to dismiss the Toshiba laptop class action lawsuit, rejecting Toshiba’s argument that the plaintiff’s complaint was moot because the company had already offered him a $2,000 judgment to resolve the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, a rule designed to “encourage settlements and avoid protracted litigation.” The plaintiff refused the payment and continued to seek class certification.

Judge Carney said that a plaintiff who refuses an offer that would provide complete relief under Rule 68 only loses the ability to pursue individual claims. The refusal, however, does not render Class Members’ claims moot. Judge Carney reasoned that “courts have largely agreed that providing complete relief only to the named plaintiff’s individual claims does not moot the putative class action, even if the offer is made prior to the certification of the class.”

In an April ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symcyk that a collective action against Genesis HealthCare Corp. could not proceed because the employer had offered full relief for the plaintiff’s individual claims, rendering the case moot. Toshiba argued that this holding applied to Hardy’s case and should be dismissed. Judge Carney, however, disagreed. He found that the Genesis decision was specific to collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act and could not be applied to class action lawsuits.

Further, Judge Carney found that even if the Genesis holding did apply to this class action lawsuit, Toshiba’s argument fails because the $2,000 offer was inadequate to satisfy Hardy’s claim because he sought injunctive and class-wide relief.

A hearing on Hardy’s motion for class certification has been scheduled for April 2014.

Hardy is represented by Cory S. Fein, Michael A. Caddell and Cynthia B. Chapman of Caddell & Chapman.

The Toshiba Laptop Class Action Lawsuit is Thomas Hardy v. Toshiba America Information Systems Inc., Case No. 8:13-cv-00516, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions