Gene Edwards v. Ford Motor Company

Good Law
603 F. App'x 538
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 27, 201513-55331California974 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Gene Edwards appeals the district court’s denial of her motion for class certification in her action against Ford Motor Company. Edwards alleges that Ford violated California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”) and Unfair Competition Law when it sold and serviced 2005-07 Freestyle vehicles without informing customers of a known defect in the electronic throttle control (“ETC”) system that caused the Freestyles to “surge,” or accelerate unexpectedly. We review the denial of class certification for abuse of discretion. Berger v. Home Depot USA, Inc., 741 F.3d 1061, 1066 (9th Cir.2014). We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Ford contends that this appeal is moot or prudentially moot because, in November 2012, after Edwards filed her petition for permission to appeal, Ford implemented a repair and reimbursement program concerning the surging-at-idle condition. In the program, Ford extended the warranty for idle surge repairs, offered a refund for owner-paid repairs made before the program was announced, and gave notice to vehicle owners and Ford dealers. The appeal is not moot, though, because Edwards seeks relief beyond that provided by the program,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.