Legal Opinion

Curl v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 2007No. 2006-0115PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 1} Two questions of law are presented to this court for resolution on this appeal: one, does Ohio law require privity of contract between parties in order to recover on a claim for breach of an implied warranty pursuant to the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act, Section 2301 et seq., Title 15, U.S.Code; and two, as a matter of law, what constitutes a new motor vehicle, as that term is used in R.C. 1345.71 et seq., Ohio’s Nonconforming New Motor Vehicle Law, also known as the Lemon Law.

{¶ 2} In the matter before us, Volkswagen of America, Inc., an…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Seely v. White Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Dippel v. ScianoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Burr v. Sherwin Williams Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Lonzrick v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1966

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
  2. McKinney v. Bayer Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2010
  3. Matanky v. Gen. Motors LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2019
  4. In re FCA US LLC Monostable Elec. Gearshift Litig.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2018
  5. Traxler v. PPG Industries, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2016

21 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