holding that the 34 v I R Civ P 8(a)(2) 35 Adams v North West Company (International) Inc 63 VI 427 438 (Super Ct 2015) (cttmg Benjamin v AIG Ins Co ofPuerto RICO 56 VI 558 566 (VI 2012)
How later courts described this case
- holding that the 34 v I R Civ P 8(a)(2) 35 Adams v North West Company (International) Inc 63 VI 427 438 (Super Ct 2015) (cttmg Benjamin v AIG Ins Co ofPuerto RICO 56 VI 558 566 (VI 2012)
- finding that there was “no overlap” between the CFA where plaintiffs sought only economic damages resulting from harm to the product itself
- finding "an inference of defectiveness" where a vehicle "suddenly and spontaneously accelerated without driver input"
- holding that the adoption of a new court rule “plainly supersedes” any cases to the contrary that applied the former rule
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
REAVLEY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I would affirm the judgment. The case was tried on the claim that a design defect of the cruise control caused the accident. That issue was decided against the plaintiffs. It was the speed of the cruise control setting that resulted in the wreck, but the control was not defective. Six years after Ford lost custody of this vehicle I see no justification for a res ipsa issue. And I see no evidence of consumer fraud by Ford.