A lawsuit against Nissan was reinstated in July of 2012 after having been dismissed in 2010. The original dismissal of the cases was based on the car maker not having any responsibility for auto parts that wear out, according to SFGate.com. The lawsuit involves 2002 in 2003 model year Nissan vehicles that the plaintiffs claim had defective parts in them that resulted in the vehicles breaking down, according to the article.
One of the issues in the case that ended up getting it dismissed was the fact that the breakdowns occurred after the five-year warranty had expired on the vehicles. In reinstating the lawsuit, the First District Court of Appeals determined that it was possible that the plaintiffs may be able to establish that there was a defective part in the vehicle that ended up causing the issues.
Currently, the lawyers for the plaintiffs want to create a class-action lawsuit involving Californians who purchased Nissan Altimas, Pathfinders and Sentras from the 2001 to 2005 model years. The parts involved were screws that ended up dislodging and causing the vehicle to lose power, according to the article.
Manufacturers and Lawsuits
In many cases, problems with vehicles involved recalled motor vehicle parts that are replaced by the manufacturers at no charge. In some cases, however, the manufacturers will dispute that there ever was a problem with the vehicle parts in question and the cases will end up going to court.
In the Nissan case in California, the plaintiff’s attorneys believe that there are enough people affected that a class-action lawsuit may be appropriate. Class-action lawsuits involve bundling many different cases up into one representative case that is heard before a jury. Because this involves a large auto manufacturer and potentially thousands of different plaintiffs, the plaintiff’s attorney is considering going forward with a class-action.
In some cases, it may be difficult to establish that an automobile manufacturer is responsible for a worn-out or defective part. Sometimes the manufacturer of the part is an entity other than the automobile manufacturer themselves. In other cases, attorneys may be able to establish that the defective product was the responsibility of the car manufacturer and those people that ended up suffering financial or physical damages due to the defective part could end up winning substantial compensation in the form of a jury award or settlement. Either way, cases involving defective auto parts are relatively common and oftentimes involve a great many different people.