Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ADVERTISING—9th Cir.: Toyota not liable for Prius fuel estimates, (Feb 6, 2014)
Law Firms Mentioned:Capstone Law APC | Loeb & Loeb LLP
Organizations Mentioned:Loeb & Loeb, LLP | Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.
By Jody Coultas, J.D.
Toyota purchasers failed to state California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) claims against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc. based on alleged omissions regarding fuel economy, the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco has held (Gray v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., February 5, 2014, Per Curiam).
The purchasers alleged that Toyota’s failure to disclose internal fuel economy data for the Prius Hybrid, which Toyota knew conflicted with EPA estimates, violated the UCL and CLRA. A district court granted Toyota’s motion to dismiss the claims with prejudice. The purchasers appealed.
California law did not support the purchasers’ claims, according to the court. Because the claims were based on Toyota’s alleged omissions, the claims turned on whether Toyota owed the purchasers a duty of disclosure. A manufacturer’s duty to consumers is limited to its warranty, unless there is a safety issue or the manufacturer made an affirmative misrepresentation. There is nothing false or misleading about a car manufacturer’s advertising that identifies the EPA fuel economy estimates for the car. The fact that Toyota omitted any further explanation of the fuel economy estimates was not a violation of the consumer protection statutes. Even if a claim could be based on omissions relating to fuel economy, Toyota stated that the actual fuel economy of each car may vary.
The case is No. 12-55362.
Attorneys: Glenn A. Danas (Capstone Law APC) for Tracy Gray. Darlene Mi-Hyung Cho (Loeb & Loeb LLP) for Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.
Companies: Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.
Cases: Advertising StateUnfairTradePractices AlaskaNews ArizonaNews CaliforniaNews HawaiiNews IdahoNews MontanaNews NevadaNews OregonNews WashingtonNews