Skip to content

A Win for Consumers in Mandatory Arbitration Cases: Recent Decision in Toyota Hybrid Brake Case

On January 30, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision in the multidistrict Toyota Motor Corp. Hybrid Brake Marketing Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, holding that the plaintiffs’ consumer fraud claims against Toyota, relating to faulty brakes in 2010 Prius models and 2010 Lexus hybrid HS […]

April 5, 2013

Toyota Hybrid Brake Case Win For Consumers

On January 30, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision in the multidistrict Toyota Motor Corp. Hybrid Brake Marketing Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, holding that the plaintiffs’ consumer fraud claims against Toyota, relating to faulty brakes in 2010 Prius models and 2010 Lexus hybrid HS 250h models, were not subject to arbitration.

Citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion—which overturned state laws that categorically preclude enforcement of class action waivers in certain arbitration agreements—Toyota moved to compel arbitration with the plaintiff car-buyers, based on an arbitration clause in the purchase agreements with their dealers. Toyota filed the motion only after failing in its effort to obtain dismissal of the plaintiffs’ lawsuit on the merits. The district court, however, refused to order arbitration because Toyota was not a signatory to the purchase agreements. In other words, the district court said that the arbitration clause was limited to the plaintiffs and the dealerships, not Toyota.

On appeal, Toyota argued that even though it was a nonsignatory, plaintiffs should nevertheless be compelled to arbitrate their consumer fraud claims because the claims are intertwined with the purchase. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected this “equitable estoppel” argument, agreeing with the plaintiffs that their consumer fraud claims against Toyota, which relate to the faulty brakes in their vehicles, are not intertwined with the purchase agreements with the dealers, which dealt with matters of financing and insurance.

In particular, the Court of Appeals noted that no court would need to examine the purchase agreements in order to resolve the plaintiffs’ claims. It also rejected Toyota’s argument that a provision in the arbitration clauses required that the issue of whether the claims belong in arbitration be addressed, in the first instance, by an arbitrator rather than the district court, pointing out that Toyota could not rely on that jurisdictional clause because, as a non-signatory to the purchase agreements, it lacked standing to do so. Having rejected Toyota’s contention that the plaintiffs’ claims are intertwined with the agreements, the Court of Appeals saw no need to address the plaintiffs’ alternative argument that, even if their claims were subject to arbitration, Toyota had forfeited any right to seek arbitration by playing a game of “heads-I-win/tails-you-lose” and filing its motion to compel arbitration only after failing in its bid to seek dismissal of the case on the merits.

Toyota marks a significant victory for consumers, especially in cases involving consumer fraud. This decision further signifies that the Supreme Court in Concepcion did not articulate a bright- line rule in deciding cases where mandatory arbitration clauses are in dispute. As we predicted in our previous blog, which examined Concepcion in detail, mandatory arbitration clauses will continue to be a hot-button issue in the courts and hopefully more cases like Toyota will arise giving more protection to consumers.

The case was argued before the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals by Seeger Weiss partner Diogenes P. Kekatos. The court’s decision is published at 705 F.3d

Related News

March 14, 2023
Seeger Weiss Obtains $10 Million Settlement In Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Medical Device Company Stimwave

New York, NY– Today, the Department of Justice announced a $10 million settlement with Florida-based medical device company Stimwave, and a criminal indictment charging former CEO Laura Perryman in connection with a scheme to create and sell a non-functioning dummy medical device for implantation into patients suffering from chronic pain.  The scheme resulted in millions […]

Read More
February 28, 2023
Eleven Seeger Weiss Partners Selected For Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers List

Seeger Weiss is proud to announce that eleven of the firm’s partners were selected for Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers list for 2023. This list celebrates attorneys who are “tenacious advocates and dogged pursuers of justice,” a description fitting for these accomplished members of the Seeger Weiss team. Founding partners Chris Seeger and Stephen […]

Read More
February 9, 2023
Former NFL Players File Class Action Lawsuit Against NFL Disability Plans, Board, Commissioner Roger Goodell For Systemic Bias Against Disabled Players

New data suggest “neutral” NFL-hired doctors who deny more claims receive higher compensation. Baltimore, MD – Former NFL players today filed a class action lawsuit against The NFL Player Disability & Survivor Benefit Plan and NFL Player Disability & Neurocognitive Benefits Plan (the Plan), the Disability Board that administers the Plan, and each of the […]

Read More