Powell v. Subaru of Am., Inc., 1:19-cv-19114

• Decision Date: 24 November 2020
• Docket Number: 1:19-cv-19114
• Citation: 502 F.Supp.3d 856
• Parties: Christine POWELL, Hunter Mills, Paul Geisler, Daniel Binkley, Ryan Hicks, Arnold Milstein, Katherine Kinsey, Jason Moore, Jeffrey Barr, Julie Wotring, Carl Eckhardt, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC. and Subaru Corporation, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

502 F.Supp.3d 856

Christine POWELL, Hunter Mills, Paul Geisler, Daniel Binkley, Ryan Hicks, Arnold Milstein, Katherine Kinsey, Jason Moore, Jeffrey Barr, Julie Wotring, Carl Eckhardt, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,

v.SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC. and Subaru Corporation, Defendants.

1:19-cv-19114

United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

Signed November 24, 2020

ABIGAIL GERTNER, BERGER MONTAGUE PC, 1818 MARKET STREET, SUITE 3600, SUITE, PA 19103, JOHN S STAPLETON, LEVAN MUHIC STAPLETON LLC, FOUR GREENTREE CENTRE, 601 ROUTE 73 N, SUITE 303, MARLTON, NJ 08053, KATRINA CARROLL, CARLSON LYNCH, LLP, 111 W. WASHINGTON STREET, SUITE 1240, CHICAGO, IL 60602, MICHAEL M. WEINKOWITZ, LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP, 510 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 500, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106, PETER HOUGHTON LEVAN, JR., LEVAN MUHIC STAPLETON LLC, FOUR GREENTREE CENTRE, 601 ROUTE 73 NORTH, SUITE 303, MARLTON, NJ 08053, PETER A. MUHIC, LEVAN MUHIC STAPLETON LLC, FOUR GREENTREE CENTRE, 601 RT 73 N, SUITE 303, Marlton, NJ 08053, Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

CASEY GENE WATKINS, BALLARD SPAHR LLP, 210 LAKE DRIVE EAST, SUITE 200, CHERRY HILL, NJ 08002, NEAL D. WALTERS, BALLARD, SPAHR LLP, 210 LAKE DRIVE EAST, SUITE 200, CHERRY HILL, NJ 08002-1163, Attorneys for Defendants.

Hillman, District Judge,

Plaintiffs have brought suit against Defendants Subaru of America, Inc. and Subaru Corporation (collectively "Subaru"), alleging that Defendants are manufacturing, marketing, and selling new vehicles with defective and dangerous windshields. This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss, or alternatively, for a more definite statement. For the reasons stated below, the Court will grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss. The Court will deny Defendants’ motion for a more definite statement.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs filed a complaint in October 2019. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on November 12, 2019. This case was then consolidated with three others on January 27, 2020, after which sixteen Plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint against Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. and Subaru of American Inc. on February 6, 2020.¹ (ECF No. 27). A related case, Zaback v. Subaru of America Inc., 1:20-02845-RBK-JS was consolidated with this matter in April 2020. (ECF No. 38). The relevant facts will be summarized below.

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended Complaint ("CAC") and the consolidated complaint from the Zaback action ("Zaback Complaint") include a nationwide class,² as well as several state-specific subclasses. Specifically, these subclasses include the: (a) California subclass, (b) Colorado subclass; (c) Delaware subclass; (d) Florida subclass; (e) Illinois subclass; (f) Indiana subclass; (g) Michigan subclass; (h) Missouri subclass; (i) New Jersey subclass; (j) North Carolina subclass; (k) Pennsylvania subclass; (l) Texas subclass; and (m) Wisconsin subclass. Plaintiffs define the Class of Vehicles as the "2017-2020 Subaru Forester, 2017-2020 Subaru Outback, 2017-2020 Subaru Crosstrek, 2017-2020 Subaru Legacy, and 2017-2020 Subaru Impreza vehicles." Defendants allege that this consolidated action concerns a putative class of 2.5 million vehicles comprising five vehicle models, crossing multiple design generations and involving multiple windshield supplies. (ECF No. 32-7 at 1).

Plaintiffs allege that Subaru provides purchasers and lessees of the class of vehicles in this case with a New Vehicle Limited Warranty ("NVLW"). According to Plaintiffs, this Warranty provides a three-year, 36,000-mile warranty for vehicles that expressly covers defect in materials or workmanship.

Plaintiffs

All Plaintiffs contend that safety and reliability were important factors in their decision to purchase a vehicle from Subaru. All Plaintiffs contend that they were unaware that the vehicles contained a defect. All Plaintiffs contend that had they been aware of this defect they would have not purchased the vehicle or would have paid less for it.

Gordon Armstrong is a citizen of California. In June 2019, Plaintiff Armstrong purchased a used 2017 Subaru Outback from Kia of Simi Valley in Simi Valley, California. In September 2019, Armstrong alleges that a small pebble hit his windshield, creating a small chip. At this time, Armstrong's car allegedly had 30,000 miles on it. According to Armstrong, over the next five weeks, this chip turned into a t-shaped crack. Armstrong alleges that when he took his vehicle in for repairs in October 2019, he had to pay $490 for the repair.

Hunter Mills is a citizen of California. In December 2018, he purchased a new 2019 Subaru Outback from a licensed dealer in California. Plaintiff Mills alleges that a few weeks after purchasing his vehicle, his windshield cracked without any apparent reason. At this time, Mills alleges his vehicle had been driven approximately 1,000 miles. Mills contacted his local Subaru dealer about a replacement windshield. Mills alleges that the dealer replaced the windshield but required Mills to pay, causing him to submit a claim to his insurer and pay the $1,000 deductible.

Paul Geisler is a citizen of California. In March 2018, he purchased a new 2018 Subaru Outback from AutoNation Subaru in Roseville, California. In July 2018, Plaintiff Geisler alleges that he observed a "long crack running through his windshield" but could not recall any incident that would have caused this damage. Geisler alleges that his vehicle had fewer than 36,000 miles on it and was within the warranty period. Nonetheless, Geisler alleges he was forced to pay $200 out of pocket for a replacement windshield.

Sandy Moreno is a citizen of California. In October 2018, Plaintiff Moreno purchased a new 2019 Subaru Outback from Elk Grove Subaru in Elk Grove, California. In December 2018, Moreno alleges that her car had approximately 5,000 miles on it when a pebble hit her windshield. Moreno contends that this pebble caused a large crack in her windshield. According to Moreno, she took her vehicle to Safelite Auto Glass in Stockton, California, where she was required to pay her insurance deductible of $100. Moreno further alleges that in February 2019, she observed another chip in her recently replaced windshield. According to Moreno, she paid an additional $75 to have the chip filled in.

Louie Nevarez is a citizen of California. In May 2018, Plaintiff Nevarez purchased a new 2018 Subaru Impreza Sport from Subaru Antelope Valley, in Lancaster, California. In August 2019, Nevarez alleges he was driving his car when the windshield suddenly cracked. According to Nevarez, this crack stretched from the driver's side to the passenger's side and "appears to have occurred spontaneously, and not as a result of a foreign object impacting the windshield." At the time he noticed the damage, Nevarez alleges the vehicle had approximately 15,000 miles on it and was within the warranty period. Nevertheless, Nevarez alleges the replacement cost him $300 when sought repairs from an independent repair shop.

Andrew Vierra is a citizen of California. In May 2019, Plaintiff Vierra purchased a new 2019 Subaru Outback from Ocean Subaru, in Fullerton, California. In November 2019, Vierra alleges that his vehicle had around 10,500 miles on it when he heard a popping sound, but saw no evidence of any impact. Vierra alleges that he later noticed a fishhook-shaped crack in the windshield near the rear-view mirror. According to Vierra, this crack extended to the middle of the driver's side of the windshield within days. When Vierra called Ocean Subaru, he alleges that he was informed that the windshield would not be replaced under warranty and subsequently contracted his insurance company. Vierra alleges he was responsible for paying $379 for a replacement windshield. According to Vierra, replacing his windshield was complicated by the technician's difficulty calibrating the vehicle's front view camera.

Daniel Binkley is a citizen of Colorado. In September 2017, he used a broker to purchase a new 2018 Subaru Outback from Heuberger Subaru in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Plaintiff Binkley noticed a crack in his windshield in November 2018. Binkley alleges he was not aware of any incident that would have caused such damage, but paid $593.91 to have it replaced at an independent repair shop. Binkley alleges that his car had fewer than 36,000 miles on it and was within the warranty period.

Ryan Hicks is a citizen of Colorado. In February 2018, he purchased a new 2018 Subaru Crosstrek from a broker in Littleton, Colorado. According to Plaintiff Hicks, in July 2019 he observed a chip in his windshield where a small stone had hit it. Later in July 2019, he observed a separate crack in his windshield. In 2019, the crack in Hicks’ windshield spread and prevented him from continuing to use the vehicle. Hicks alleges that he was not aware of any incidents that would have caused this damage. Hicks contacted a Subaru dealership to request a replacement windshield, and was advised there was no coverage for the windshield. Hicks had the windshield replaced by a different vendor and paid a $500 deductible. At this point, Hicks’ vehicle had fewer than 36,000 miles on it and was within the warranty period.

Stephen Merman is a citizen of Colorado. In July 2019, Plaintiff Merman purchased a pre-owned 2018 Subaru Forester from AutoNation Subaru West in Golden, Colorado. In October 2019, when Merman's car had approximately 23,000 miles on it, his life partner's daughter was driving the vehicle when a crack occurred in the top left corner of the windshield. Neither Merman's life partner, who was a passenger in the car, or his life partner's daughter saw any debris hit the car. Soon after, Merman alleges that he observed the crack spread from the top left corner to the rear-view mirror of the windshield. Merman took the vehicle to AutoNation Subaru West, who informed him that they do not replace windshields. Next, Merman alleges he took his...