Current Cases

Maugain, et al. v. FCA US LLC

Status Current Case

Practice area Consumer Protection

Court U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware

Case number 1:22-cv-00116-VAC-MPT


On February 7, 2023, the Honorable Gregory B. Williams of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied in part Fiat Chrysler of America’s (FCA) motion to dismiss this putative consumer class action, and permitted the putative class to proceed on allegations that FCA sold defective Pentastar 3.6 liter V6 engines in 2014 or newer Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, or RAM-branded vehicles violating implied breach of warranty and unjust enrichment statutes under federal and state laws of California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas. 

Case Background

Fiat Chrysler America (FCA) is a Delaware limited liability company (LLC) headquartered in Auburn Hills, Michigan that designs, manufactures, markets, distributes, services, repairs, sells, and leases the Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, or RAM-branded vehicles nationwide. FCA also provides warranty coverage for these vehicles.

According to the first amended class action complaint, filed on May 18, 2022, Plaintiffs claim that defective engines prematurely fail and are unable to accomplish the fundamental elements of the function of an internal combustion engine. The vehicles generate an audible ticking noise and then may buck and surge and, eventually, the engines may fail while the vehicles are being driven, leading to an increased threat of stalling, loss of motive power, and collision.

Plaintiffs also claim that FCA knew as early as 2013 about these severe defects, such as from internal testing, customer complaints, and supplier communications, but still touted the quality, durability, reliability, and performance of the vehicles at issue via its public statements and multimedia marketing campaigns.

Furthermore, Plaintiffs claim that FCA instructed car dealers to replace defective parts with new parts that have the same defect while informing consumers that the vehicles were fixed, including when the repairs were made under warranty.

Finally, Plaintiffs allege that they overpaid for the vehicles and have (or must) expend significant money to have their vehicles repaired and cannot use their Vehicles for the purposes that FCA advertised.

Case name: Maugain, et al. v. FCA US LLC, Case 1:22-cv-00116-VAC-MPT, United States District Court for the District of Delaware