Phonacelle Handy v. General Motors Corporation, Maxine Herzog v. General Motors Corporation, a Corporation of the State of Delaware

Good Law
518 F.2d 786·20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 988
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 7, 197573-1462, 73-2246California1,069 words

Opinion

Opinion

The district court dismissed two actions seeking damages and injunctive relief claimed under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 15 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq. (the Act), and the plaintiffs appeal.

Plaintiffs are purchasers of Chevrolet automobiles who claim their cars lost value because of defective assembly. They demanded money damages for the “excess depreciation” after the defect was discovered. They also prayed for injunctions compelling General Motors (GM) to make repairs and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to cause General Motors to

furnish additional notification of defect to vehicle owners. See 15 U.S-C. § 1402.

The district court correctly ruled that the plaintiffs may not, by combining their claims with those of similarly situated purchasers, aggregate their damage demands to reach the $10,-000 jurisdictional amount required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332 . See Zahn v. International Paper Co., 414 U.S. 291 , 94 S.Ct. 505 , 38 L.Ed.2d 511 (1973); Snyder v. Harris, 394 U.S. 332, 335, 338 , 89 S.Ct. 1053 , 22 L.Ed.2d 319 (1969).

The appellants argue alternatively that jurisdiction should be based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1337 and the terms of…

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.