Acura Hands-Free Calling Lawsuit Can Proceed
September 4, 2022
September 4, 2022
A lawsuit alleging the hands-free calling feature in certain Acura models drains the battery will proceed, having partially survived America Honda Motor Company, Inc.’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.
As discussed in the Court’s August 26, 2022, order, the plaintiffs allege the hands-free calling feature in their vehicles causes “parasitic drain” on the battery by failing to reliably switch off, even after the car’s ignition switch is turned off. This alleged defect leads to the vehicles not starting after a period of non-use and electrical systems prone to failure even when the vehicle is in operation. The plaintiffs contend Honda has known of this defect since at least 2005, notifying dealers of it but concealing it from consumers.
The plaintiffs raised legal claims including violations of state consumer laws, fraud by concealment, and breach of warranty. Honda moved for judgment on the pleadings, seeking to establish on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remained to be resolved and Honda was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. As the court explained, in reviewing such a motion, it had to presume all factual allegations of the complaint to be true and draw all reasonable inferences in favoring of the non-moving party—that is, the plaintiffs.
The court rejected Honda’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on two of the plaintiffs’ fraud-by-concealment claims. The court granted Honda’s motion with respect to certain California Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), California Unfair Business Practices Act (UCL), and Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claims, but also granted the plaintiff’s request for leave to amend their CLRA and UCL claims. The order gives the plaintiffs 14 days from the date of the order to file an amended complaint.
The case is Yun-Fei Lou, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., case number 4:16-cv-04384-JST, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
You can read the Court’s order below: