Toyota Federal Appellate Court Decisions

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 18-55688

Bankruptcy. The panel affirmed the district court’s affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s ruling that a creditor’s post-discharge collection efforts on a vehicle lease did not violate the discharge injunction in a Chapter 7 case. The debtor sent the creditor a signed lease assumption agreement before she received her bankruptcy discharge. The panel held that debtors’ lease assumptions survive discharge even if they are not reaffirmed under 11 U.S.C. § 524(c).…

TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION v. REACTIVE SURFACES LTD., LLP

Filed: July 10, 2020

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case Number: 18-1906

Kristin Smith v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: July 7, 2020

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 18-2585

[Kobes, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges] Civil case -Products liability. Given plaintiff's concessions that there was no evidence relating to the design of the seatbelt in her Toyota 4Runner and that her claim centered instead on failure to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209, the district court did not err in determining she had abandoned her claim for strict liability; plaintiff failed to preserve her arguments that the district court improperly…

Frederick Silver v. Toyota Motor Mfg, TX, Inc., et

Filed: April 14, 2020

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Case Number: 19-50441

CASSANDRA MCNAIR-STEPNEY V. TOYOTA MOTOR CORP.

Filed: June 4, 2018

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 16-55327

HELENE CAHEN V. TOYOTA MOTOR CORP.

Filed: December 21, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 16-15496

Richard Rosenbaum v. Toyota Motor Sales

Filed: September 12, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Case Number: 16-2769

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2507

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2638

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2637

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2636

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2635

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2516

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…

Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Filed: August 11, 2017

Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2511

Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. In products liability claiming plaintiffs were injured through unintended acceleration of plaintiff Lee's Toyota Camry, the jury found Lee was 40% responsible for the collision and assessed Toyota's fault at 60%. The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of "other similar incidents" of unintended acceleration as the circumstances surrounding each incident and this incident…