Suits & Settlements: The Car Pro Legal Roundup

In this week’s Suits & Settlements, you’ll find the following reports: 

• FORD SEEKS TO DISMISS F-150 OIL CONSUMPTION CLAIMS
• TESLA'S $243 MILLION AUTOPILOT VERDICT FIGHT MOVES TO APPEALS COURT
• GM SUED OVER ALLEGED TRUCK OIL-COOLING DEFECT
• HYUNDAI AND KIA FACE NEW LAWSUIT OVER EV CHARGING CONTROL FAILURES

FORD SEEKS TO DISMISS F-150 OIL CONSUMPTION CLAIMS

Ford Motor Co. is asking a Michigan federal judge to dismiss claims brought by seven F-150 owners who allege the automaker concealed an excessive oil-consumption problem in certain pickups. The litigation involves 2018 through 2020 F-150s equipped with the 5.0-liter V8. The owners allege their engines can consume excessive amounts of oil between changes, potentially resulting in premature engine wear and other problems, and contend Ford knew about the condition before they purchased their trucks. Ford disputes those allegations and argues the plaintiffs have not plausibly established that the company knew of the alleged defect at the time each vehicle was sold. Ford issued technical service information addressing oil-consumption complaints in these trucks, including procedures involving an updated powertrain-control-module calibration and a revised engine-oil dipstick, but disputes the plaintiffs' characterization of those measures as evidence that it knowingly concealed a defect. The lawsuit also alleges the measures did not correct the underlying problem. Ford's latest motion seeks dismissal of claims including fraudulent concealment and violations of various state consumer-protection laws. No class has been certified, the court has not determined that the engines are defective, and Ford's latest motion remains pending.

TESLA'S $243 MILLION AUTOPILOT VERDICT FIGHT MOVES TO APPEALS COURT

The legal battle over a $243 million jury verdict against Tesla involving a fatal 2019 Autopilot crash is now before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A Florida federal jury found Tesla partly responsible for the crash involving a Model S whose driver was using Autopilot when the vehicle struck a parked Chevrolet Tahoe in Key Largo, killing Naibel Benavides Leon and seriously injuring Dillon Angulo. The jury awarded $129 million in total compensatory damages and assigned Tesla 33% of the responsibility, while assigning 67% to the driver. Jurors also imposed $200 million in punitive damages against Tesla. Tesla is appealing the verdict, and the American Association for Justice, an organization representing plaintiffs' attorneys, has now filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the appeals court to uphold it. The organization disputes Tesla's argument that product-liability law and punitive damages can effectively impose a tax on innovation, contending instead that liability encourages manufacturers to develop safer products. Tesla maintains that the verdict and damages are not supported by the facts and law and is asking the appellate court to overturn the judgment. The 11th Circuit has not ruled, so the $243 million verdict remains subject to appellate review.

GM SUED OVER ALLEGED TRUCK OIL-COOLING DEFECT

General Motors is facing a new proposed class action alleging that an oil-cooling system defect in certain Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups can result in complete engine failure. A group of truck owners filed the lawsuit in federal court in Michigan, alleging problems involving the vehicles' oil-cooling systems can cause a loss of engine oil and ultimately catastrophic engine damage. The owners contend GM knew about the alleged problem but did not issue a recall and, in some instances, refused to cover resulting engine failures under warranty. The plaintiffs are seeking to represent other owners of affected trucks and are pursuing claims under warranty and consumer-protection laws. The case is at a very early stage, and the allegations should not be confused with a finding that the trucks actually contain a common defect. GM has not been found liable, no class has been certified, and there has been no court determination that the company concealed a problem or improperly denied warranty coverage. This lawsuit is also separate from the other recent GM engine and transmission cases we've covered. For now, the significant development is that owners have taken the oil-cooling allegations to federal court and are attempting to pursue their claims on a classwide basis.

HYUNDAI AND KIA FACE NEW LAWSUIT OVER EV CHARGING CONTROL FAILURES

Hyundai and Kia are facing a new proposed class-action lawsuit alleging that defective Integrated Charging Control Units, or ICCUs, can cause electrical problems and loss of drive power in certain Hyundai, Kia and Genesis electric vehicles. The lawsuit was filed Sept. 23 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and involves vehicles built on the automakers' E-GMP electric-vehicle architecture. The ICCU performs several functions, including converting high-voltage battery power to keep the vehicle's 12-volt battery charged. The plaintiffs allege that when the ICCU or its associated fuse fails, the 12-volt battery can stop receiving sufficient charge, potentially resulting in warning messages, reduced acceleration, a dead battery or complete loss of drive power. Hyundai and Kia previously recalled certain EVs for ICCU-related problems, but the lawsuit alleges the recall remedies, including software updates and component replacements when necessary, have not provided a lasting solution for all affected vehicles. The complaint includes certain model years of the Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 6, Kia EV6 and EV9, and several Genesis electric models. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and other relief under federal warranty and state consumer-protection laws. No class has been certified, and no court has determined that the ICCUs are defective, that previous recall remedies were inadequate or that either automaker concealed a defect.