446 F.Supp.3d 218
E.D. Mich.2020Background
- Plaintiff Sarah Lalli (Florida) bought a new 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee with a monostable electronic gearshift on December 17, 2014; she alleges only economic loss (diminished value), no personal injury.
- Lalli sued FCA US LLC in January 2019 asserting FDUTPA, fraudulent concealment, breach of express warranty (state law and Magnuson-Moss), and unjust enrichment on behalf of herself and a proposed Florida class; case joined to MDL 2744.
- A prior Florida plaintiff (Andollo) had materially identical claims in a separate multi-state action but that plaintiff’s case was dismissed for want of prosecution.
- FCA moved to dismiss arguing: FDUTPA claims are time-barred; fraudulent concealment is barred by Florida’s economic loss rule; express warranty claims fail for lack of pre-suit notice; unjust enrichment duplicates contract remedies.
- The court: dismissed the putative FDUTPA class claims but allowed Lalli’s individual FDUTPA claim (American Pipe tolling); rejected economic-loss dismissal of fraudulent concealment; dismissed express warranty and Magnuson-Moss counts for lack of pre-suit notice; permitted unjust enrichment to proceed in the alternative.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of FDUTPA claims / class tolling | Lalli: her individual FDUTPA claim is timely under American Pipe; class claims should relate back or be tolled. | FCA: FDUTPA claims are beyond the 4-year limitations period; Rule 15 relation-back and class tolling cannot rescue a new suit; no equitable tolling applies. | Court: Putative Florida class FDUTPA claims dismissed as untimely; Lalli’s individual FDUTPA claim may proceed under American Pipe; delayed-discovery and equitable estoppel doctrines inapplicable to FDUTPA. |
| Fraudulent concealment and the economic-loss rule | Lalli: fraudulent concealment claim is viable despite purely economic damages. | FCA: Florida’s economic-loss rule bars tort claims seeking only economic loss. | Court: Denied dismissal; economic-loss rule is limited by Florida Supreme Court to products-liability context and does not bar fraudulent-inducement/concealment here. |
| Breach of express warranty / pre-suit notice | Lalli: warranty claim should proceed; actual knowledge or manufacturer status excuses notice. | FCA: Fla. Stat. § 672.607 requires buyer to notify seller within a reasonable time; Lalli never gave pre-suit notice, so claim fails. | Court: Dismissed breach-of-express-warranty and Magnuson-Moss counts for failure to allege pre-suit notice; rejected arguments excusing notice based on manufacturer status. |
| Unjust enrichment (alternative pleading) | Lalli: may plead unjust enrichment in the alternative to breach of warranty; recover if warranty remedy unavailable. | FCA: unjust enrichment duplicates express-warranty contract remedy and should be dismissed. | Court: Denied dismissal of unjust enrichment; allowed it to proceed in the alternative given dispute over warranty coverage and because express warranty claim was dismissed on notice grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (class tolling suspends statute of limitations for individual claims after class filing)
- China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, 138 S. Ct. 1800 (American Pipe does not revive new, untimely class claims)
- Tiara Condominium Ass'n v. Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc., 110 So.3d 399 (Fla. 2013) (Florida Supreme Court limits economic-loss rule to products-liability cases)
- General Matters, Inc. v. Paramount Canning Co., 382 So.2d 1262 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980) (Florida precedent recognizing pre-suit notice requirement for warranty claims)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard for Rule 12(b)(6) plausibility)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard establishing factual plausibility requirement)
- Casa Clara Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc., 620 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 1993) (defining economic loss concept under Florida law)