Legal Opinion
Chase v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided October 31, 2003No. Record 022575PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lemons
On appeal, we consider whether, under the Virginia Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act, Code §§ 59.1-207.9 to -207.16.1, a consumer who settles with a defendant is entitled to attorney’s fees as a “successful” party.
I. Facts and Proceedings Below
On June 9, 1999, Kristy L. Chase (“Chase”) purchased a new Chrysler Cirrus. The car had a number of mechanical problems. On August 16, 2001, Chase filed a motion for judgment against Daimler-Chrysler Corporation (“DaimlerChrysler”), the car’s manufacturer, for breach of warranty, violation of the Virginia Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act (the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Watkins v. HallSupreme Court of Virginia · 1934
- Halifax Corp. v. First Union National BankSupreme Court of Virginia · 2001
- Sheets v. CastleSupreme Court of Virginia · 2002
- SIGNAL Corp. v. Keane Federal Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2003
3Cited by52 opinions
- Boynton v. KilgoreSupreme Court of Virginia · 2006
- Ulloa v. Qsp, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2006
- Zoroastrian Center & Darb-E-Mehr v. Rustam Guiv FoundationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2016
- Justin Fairfax v. CBS CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2021
- Central Virginia Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.C. v. WhitfieldCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2004
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.