In this week’s Suits & Settlements, you’ll find the following reports:
Class Action Targets Subaru for Repeated Battery Failures. Subaru is facing a proposed class-action lawsuit in New Jersey federal court alleging the automaker sold hundreds of thousands of vehicles with defective electrical systems that prematurely drain batteries, according to Law360. Plaintiffs claim the defect causes batteries to fail unexpectedly, forcing owners to repeatedly replace batteries and, in some cases, leaving drivers stranded when vehicles will not start. The lawsuit alleges Subaru knew or should have known about the issue through warranty claims, customer complaints and dealership service records but failed to adequately correct the problem or warn consumers. The complaint seeks damages along with broader remedies that could include a recall, reimbursement for battery replacements or even vehicle buybacks for affected owners. While battery drain complaints have surfaced periodically across the industry as vehicles become increasingly dependent on complex electronics and always-on systems, the suit argues Subaru’s alleged defect goes beyond ordinary wear and tear and represents a systemic design problem. Subaru has not publicly responded to the lawsuit or admitted wrongdoing. The case adds to a growing number of automotive class actions centered on electrical systems, software management and parasitic battery drain issues as modern vehicles rely more heavily on connected technology, sensors and power-hungry convenience features that continue operating even when the vehicle is turned off.
Judge Throws Out Nissan Leaf EV Fire Risk Lawsuit. A California federal judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit accusing Nissan of selling Leaf electric vehicles with defective batteries that plaintiffs claimed created a fire risk during fast charging, according to Law360. The lawsuit alleged the Leaf’s battery system could overheat during DC fast charging sessions, potentially increasing the risk of thermal events and battery degradation. However, U.S. District Judge James Donato ruled the plaintiffs failed to plausibly show the vehicles were unsafe or that the alleged defect caused actual economic harm sufficient to support the claims. The judge also concluded further amendments to the complaint would be “futile,” effectively ending the case at the district court level unless plaintiffs appeal. Nissan denied the allegations throughout the litigation and argued the plaintiffs relied largely on speculation and isolated complaints rather than evidence of a widespread safety defect. The ruling marks a significant win for the automaker as EV manufacturers continue facing increased scrutiny and litigation over battery performance, charging behavior and thermal management systems. While electric vehicle battery fires remain statistically rare compared with gasoline vehicle fires, concerns surrounding charging infrastructure, battery longevity and heat management have become recurring themes in consumer lawsuits as EV adoption grows. Legal experts say the dismissal also highlights the increasingly high evidentiary bar plaintiffs face when attempting to turn technical battery-performance concerns into large-scale product liability or consumer fraud class actions.
Goodyear Seeks FCC Waiver for Next-Generation Smart Tires. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. is seeking federal approval for a new generation of “smart tire” sensor technology that could enhance vehicle safety and performance monitoring but currently falls outside existing communications rules, according to Law360. The company has asked the Federal Communications Commission for a waiver that would allow the sensors to operate despite restrictions tied to radio frequency usage and transmission standards. Goodyear says the developing technology could provide real-time tire data including pressure, temperature, tread wear and road condition information designed to improve safety, efficiency and predictive maintenance. However, the sensors apparently require operating parameters that do not neatly fit within current FCC regulations governing low-power communications devices. The request highlights the increasingly complex legal and regulatory challenges automakers and suppliers face as vehicles become more connected and data-driven. Advanced tire monitoring systems are viewed by many in the industry as a potential next step beyond traditional tire pressure monitoring systems now mandatory on modern vehicles, especially as autonomous driving and fleet management technologies continue evolving. The FCC has not yet ruled on Goodyear’s request, but the outcome could influence how quickly next-generation smart tire technology reaches the market and how aggressively suppliers pursue additional connected-vehicle innovations requiring expanded wireless capabilities.
GM Pays $12.75 Million in California OnStar Privacy Settlement. General Motors has agreed to pay $12.75 million to settle a California privacy lawsuit alleging the automaker illegally collected and sold detailed driving data from OnStar customers without proper consent, according to Reuters and Carscoops. California Attorney General Rob Bonta said GM gathered names, addresses, phone numbers, precise GPS locations and driving behavior data — including speeding, hard braking and rapid acceleration — from hundreds of thousands of drivers between 2020 and 2024, then sold the information to data brokers Verisk Analytics and LexisNexis Risk Solutions. State officials alleged some of that data ultimately reached insurance companies, potentially affecting premiums outside California. Under the proposed settlement, GM will pay civil penalties, stop selling driving data to brokers for five years and delete retained driver data collected through its discontinued Smart Driver program. Regulators said GM made roughly $20 million from the data-sharing operation, which California officials called a violation of the state’s consumer privacy and unfair competition laws. GM said the agreement relates to a product it ended in 2024 and maintains the company has since strengthened privacy protections and transparency for customers. The case marks one of the largest automotive privacy settlements yet involving connected vehicle technology and highlights growing scrutiny over how modern vehicles collect, store and monetize driver information.