ILNews

Indiana woman sues Toyota due to recall

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Hamilton County woman has filed a class action suit against Toyota, alleging fraud and breach of warranties as a result of the recent recall of Toyota vehicles.

Judith M. Enderle filed the suit Wednesday in federal court claiming Toyota knew their cars had defects in the accelerator systems when people purchased them, failed to recall the defective cars at the earliest possible date, and blamed the defect on floor mats.

She seeks class action certification, an award of punitive or exemplary damages against Toyota, restitution and disgorgement of profits, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. She also wants a jury trial.

Enderle purchased a 2006 Toyota Avalon from an Indianapolis Toyota dealer in 2006; that car is subject to the January 2010 recall. She seeks to bring this case as a class action for every person or entity in Indiana who owns a Toyota car that is subject to the recall for defects in the accelerator system. The suit only seeks recovery for economic losses of the class and not recovery for personal injury.

Enderle seeks damages from the company resulting from the "serious" safety defect that renders the vehicles unfit for their intended and expected purpose, according to the suit. She claims Toyota breached implied and express warranties, received unjust enrichment, and committed constructive fraud and negligence, and is liable for its design, manufacturing, and sales of the cars. Nearly 5.3 million cars have been recalled nationwide because of the accelerator defect.

The suit, Judith M. Enderle, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Toyota Motor North America Inc., et al., No. 1:10-CV-142, was filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. She's represented by Cohen & Malad in Indianapolis.

Enderle's suit joins the list of lawsuits around the country filed by Toyota owners as a result of the recall. Irwin Levin, one of Enderle's attorneys, said he believes hers is the first one filed in Indiana. Some of those suits involve incidents of stuck gas pedals and injuries. Enderle's gas pedal has not become stuck, Levin said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT