Legal Opinion
Beyer v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 1, 2001PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Altman, J. P.
The primary issue on this appeal is whether the plaintiff, who leased rather than purchased a vehicle, is entitled to the consumer protections afforded by the Magnuson-Moss War*105ranty — Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (15 USC § 2301 et seq.). We conclude that she is entitled to seek relief under the statute.
Pursuant to a written lease dated February 6, 1997, the plaintiff leased a new 1997 Jeep Grand Cherokee from the defendant Storms Motors, Inc. (hereinafter Storms), for a term of 36 months. The vehicle was manufactured by the defendant…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Guggenheimer v. GinzburgNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Rovello v. Orofino Realty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Riley v. County of BroomeNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- Arthur Jaffee Associates v. Bilsco Auto Service, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Freeman v. Hubco Leasing, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1985
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- DiCintio v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Beyer v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Mintz v. American Tax Relief, LLCNew York Supreme Court · 2007
- Beyer v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002