Legal Opinion

DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Inman

Texas Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 2008No. 03-1189PublishedCited by 305 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NATHAN L. HECHT, Justice.

Three plaintiffs have sued for themselves and a nationwide class of some ten million owners and lessees of Daimler-Chrysler vehicles, equipped with Gen-3 seatbelt buckles, and sold over the course of a decade. They allege that it is too easy to press the release button on the buckle and unlatch it without intending to do so. They do not contend that this is unavoidable, probable, or even eventual, only that it is possible. Two of the plaintiffs have never experienced anything like what they claim might happen, and the third is not sure whether he has or not, but he…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control BoardTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Raines v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by305 opinions

  1. Kerry Heckman, on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Williamson CountyTexas Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Finance Commission v. NorwoodTexas Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy TrustTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Andrade v. NAACP of AustinTexas Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Meyers v. JDC/Firethorne, Ltd.Texas Supreme Court · 2018

300 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API