Parrot v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RYAN, Justice.
¶ 1 In this case, we must determine whether an automobile lessee can maintain an action under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (‘Warranty Act” or “Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301-2312 (2000), and whether the lessee has a right to pursue remedies under the Arizona Motor Vehicle Warranties Act (“Lemon Law”), Ariz.Rev.Stat. (“A.R.S.”) §§ 44-1261 to -1267 (2003 & Supp.2005). We hold that, under the circumstances of this case, a lessee neither can sue under the Warranty Act nor have remedies under the Lemon Law.
I
¶ 2 Bill Parrot leased a 2000 Jeep Cherokee from Pitre Chrysler Plymouth…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Kent K. v. Bobby M.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- Canon School District No. 50 v. W.E.S. Construction Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1994
- Mesa v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLCDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005
- DiCintio v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Yollin v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
- Premier Physicians Group, PLLC v. NavarroArizona Supreme Court · 2016
- Johnson v. Earnhardt's Gilbert Dodge, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2006
- State ex rel. Montgomery v. HarrisArizona Supreme Court · 2014
- Farris v. Advantage Capital Corp.Arizona Supreme Court · 2007
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.