Crisis Legal NewsClick here to add this website to your favorites
  rss
Crisis News Search >>>



More than 150 lawsuits against Toyota Motor Corp. over alleged sudden-acceleration problems and related injuries have been consolidated before a single federal judge in Santa Ana, about 30 miles from the automaker's U.S. headquarters in Torrance.

That means that while federal investigations into the causes of the unintended speeding continue in Washington, Southern California now will be the focal point for assessing any personal damages.

In a ruling handed down Friday, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation allowed more than 100 suits seeking class-action status, as well as at least 50 personal injury cases, to be adjudicated in a single federal courtroom. The seven-member panel assigned the case to Judge James V. Selna, who was appointed to the federal bench in 2003 by President George W. Bush.

The ruling applies only to federal cases and not lawsuits filed in state courts.

Toyota has been subject to an onslaught of legal filings since it announced its largest-ever recall last September for floor mats that can entrap accelerator pedals and cause unintended acceleration. Since then, Toyota has also recalled vehicles for gas pedals that can stick, as well as some Prius models for brake problems. In total, the Japanese automaker has issued nearly 10 million recall notices for cars and trucks since fall.

Late last month, the federal panel heard testimony from dozens of lawyers on whether to consider the cases separately or consolidate them in a procedure called multidistrict litigation.

Although some plaintiff attorneys argued that the lawsuits should be handled individually, many parties, including Toyota, successfully countered that the legal process would be best served if the cases were argued in one courtroom.


© Crisis Legal News - All Rights Reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal Crisis News
as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or
a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.