Legal Opinion
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Spitzer
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 14, 2006PublishedCited by 172 opinions
POINTS OF COUNSEL
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Graffeo, J.
The purchaser of a new motor vehicle is entitled to a “repair presumption” and therefore can seek relief under the New Car Lemon Law when the consumer can demonstrate that the vehicle has been subject to repair four or more times within a prescribed time period and the same substantial defect continues to exist. The common issue in these two appeals is whether a consumer, who claims the benefit of the presumption, must also establish that the vehicle remains defective at the time of trial or arbitration. We conclude that the statute does not require such a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Central School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Riley v. County of BroomeNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- In re the Claim of GruberNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- MTR. STATE v. Ford Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
- White v. County of CortlandNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by172 opinions
- Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Properties, L.P.New York Court of Appeals · 2009
- Samiento v. World Yacht Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2008
- Albany Law School v. New York State Office of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesNew York Court of Appeals · 2012
- Zakrzewska v. NEW SCHOOLNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
- Tantaros v. Fox News Network, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021
167 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.