• Mortle, et al. v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Case No. 04-CV-1291(2006 Jury Decision)

  Mr. Mortle and business partner, Mr. Kiriaki, purchased a 2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 for $78,795.00.  After their vehicle was out of service more than 30 days and in for repair more than four times due to problems with rear end noise, transmission, clutch, and pressure plate, they requested that DaimlerChrysler provide them with a refund.  DaimlerChrysler refused to provide relief and the matter went to trial.  The jury found in favor of Mr. Mortle and Mr. Kiriaki. Chrysler appealed the decision, however the case was settled shortly after the appeal and the appeal was dismissed.  DaimlerChrysler paid Mr. Mortle and Mr. Kiriaki over $190,000.00 plus attorney fees.

• Garcia v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc. , 2004 WI 93; 273 Wis. 2d 612, 682 N.W.2d 365 (2004 Supreme Court Decision)

  Ms. Garcia purchased a 2001 Mazda Tribute. Transmission problems appeared shortly thereafter and eventually Ms. Garcia filed her own notice with Mazda requesting a replacement vehicle under the Wisconsin Lemon Law. Mazda failed to provide a replacement vehicle to Ms. Garcia within the time frame provided by the Wisconsin Lemon Law, as well as imposed conditions not required under the Lemon Law in order for her to obtain a replacement vehicle. Ms. Garcia sought our assistance in filing suit against Mazda. Mazda was successful in both the Circuit Court and Court of Appeals arguing that Ms. Garcia's notice was insufficient to trigger the Lemon Law because she did not properly offer to transfer title of her lemon vehicle. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, however, reversed the lower Court's rulings, concluding that Ms. Garcia's notice was sufficient and it remanded the case back to the circuit court. The case was eventually settled with a very favorable outcome to Ms. Garcia (she received twice the purchase price of her vehicle), with Mazda paying her attorney fees.

• Fry v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Case No. 03-CV-1232 (2005 Jury Decision)

  Mr. Fry experienced a drive train noise with the 2002 Jeep Grand Cherokee he purchased for $29,637. DaimlerChrysler denied his lemon law claim and took the matter to trial. The jury found in favor of Mr. Fry, deeming his vehicle a lemon. DaimlerChrysler paid Mr. Fry over $73,000, plus attorney fees.
  

• Schug v. Audi of America, Inc., Case No. 03-CV-1787 (2004 Jury Decision)

  Mr. Schug purchased a 2002 Audi TT Coupe quattro for $38,975. After his vehicle was in for service for over 30 days within the first year after purchase for numerous problems, Mr. Schug requested that Audi provide him with a comparable vehicle. Audi agreed, but refused to provide a vehicle that included the “premium package” (upgraded tires and wheels), an option that our client paid $1,450 for on his lemon vehicle. The only issue at trial was whether or not the proposed replacement vehicle was truly comparable to his lemon vehicle. The jury did not believe that it was; Mr. Schug recovered over $109,000, plus attorney fees.
  

• MacKay v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. 03-CV-1947 (2005 Jury Decision)

  Mr. MacKay experienced an engine surging/idling condition with his leased 2002 Ford Explorer. Ford took the case to trial, arguing that Mr. MacKay was stepping on the accelerator and brake at the same time, causing the surging conditions. Ultimately, the jury did not buy Ford’s argument and decided that Mr. MacKay’s vehicle was indeed a lemon. Ford ended up having to pay Mr. MacKay over $47,000, plus his attorney fees (Mr. MacKay had only paid $17,000 under the terms of his lease).
  

• Dieter v. Chrysler Corporation, 2000 WI 45, 234 Wis. 2d 670, 610 N.W.2d 832 (2000 Supreme Court Decision)
  
  The Dieters purchased a 1996 Dodge Ram Pick-up Truck with paint problems. Chrysler was successful in getting the trial court to dismiss the consumers' case on a legal issue (because it was believed that the paint problems resulted from the installation of accessories by the dealer); the Wisconsin Court of Appeals agreed (because the Dieters knew about the paint problems at the time of purchase). However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision and allowed the consumers to proceed with their case. Thereafter, Chrysler settled the case upon favorable terms, paying damages to the Dieters, as well as paying the Dieters' attorney fees.

• Kiss v. General Motors Corporation, 2001 WI App 122, 246 Wis. 2d 364, 630 N.W.2d 742 (2001 Court of Appeals Decision)
  
  Mr. Kiss purchased a 1997 GMC Sierra 3500 Heavy Duty tow truck. The vehicle developed performance problems with the vehicle itself (as opposed to the tow package). General Motors offered Mr. Kiss a new vehicle, but insisted upon transferring his old tow package onto the new vehicle. Mr. Kiss wanted a new tow package and filed suit. The trial court dismissed his case, because it felt that Mr. Kiss was not entitled to a new tow package. However, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Mr. Kiss was entitled to a new tow truck with a new tow package. Thereafter, General Motors settled the case upon favorable terms, paying damages to Mr. Kiss, as well as paying Mr. Kiss's attorney fees.
  

• Herzberg v. Ford Motor Company, 2001 WI App 65, 242 Wis. 2d 316, 626 N.W.2d 67 (2001 Court of Appeals Decision)
  
  The Herzbergs purchased a 1998 Mercury Mystique. They proceeded with a lemon law claim against Ford. Ford agreed to a refund, but required information about the condition of the vehicle before it would provide the refund. The Herzbergs refused, and filed suit. The trial court determined that Ford had violated the Wisconsin Lemon Law by making the refund conditional, and awarded the Herzbergs $34,416.28, twice the amount of the purchase price, plus attorney fees. Ford appealed. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed the trial Court decision.
  

• Chariton v. Saturn Corporation, 2000 WI App 148; 238 Wis. 2d 27, 615 N.W.2d 209 (2000 Court of Appeals Decision)
  
  Ms. Chariton purchased a 1996 Saturn vehicle, that turned out to be problematic. She proceeded with a lemon law claim against Saturn. Saturn agreed to provide Ms. Chariton with a refund, but required that she sign a release as a condition of her receiving such refund. Ms. Chariton refused, and filed suit. The trial court determined that Saturn had violated the Wisconsin Lemon Law by failing to provide Ms. Chariton with her refund within the statutorily required 30 day period. Saturn appealed. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court that Saturn had failed to provide Ms. Chariton with her refund in a timely manner, and determined that it could not require her to sign a release as a condition. Ms. Chariton collected double damages (double her purchase price), plus attorney fees.

• Riley v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. 99-CV-394 (2001 Jury Decision)
  
  Mr. Riley experienced various problems with his 1998 Lincoln Town Car, including a pulling problem. Ford initially refused to provide Mr. Riley with lemon law relief, but later reconsidered and belatedly tried to provide him with some money back. Mr. Riley had leased the vehicle for 24 months, paying approximately $15,777.39 under the terms of his lease. After a favorable jury verdict, Mr. Riley collected $38,056.32, plus attorney fees.

Sampling of Settlements:

The vast majority of the well over 1000 claims which we have brought on behalf of Wisconsin consumers since 1990 have been settled to our clients' overwhelming satisfaction. A few examples of such settlements include:

• After their 2004 Buick Park Avenue was out of service more than 30 days as well as in for repair more than four times in the first year due to electrical problems, our clients sought relief from General Motors.  General Motors failed to provide our clients with a comparable new vehicle; a suit was then filed.  The case eventually settled and our clients received a new 2006 Cadillac DTS, plus attorney fees.
  

• Our client sought relief from Ford after its 2005 Ford F450 was out of service for more than 30 days within the first year of ownership due to engine/shifting problems.  Ford failed to provide a refund; a suit was then filed against Ford.  The case eventually settled and our client received $59,508.25, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle – $37,739.00).
  

• Our client sought relief from General Motors after its 2005 Chevrolet C2500 Truck was out of service 30 days as well as in for repair four times within the first year due to power steering problems.  General Motors failed to provide our client with a comparable new vehicle; a suit was then filed against General Motors.  The case eventually settled and our client received $61,547.55, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle – $49,525.00).
  

• Our clients requested a comparable new vehicle after their 2003 GMC Savana Conversion Van was in for repairs more than four times in the first year due to various problems.  General Motors responded that they were unable to comply with the request; we filed suit on our clients’ behalf.  After settlement our clients recovered $48,000.00, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle – $34,561.00).
  

• A service station owner had engine/stalling concerns with his new 2004 GMC 6500 Heavy Duty Truck. A claim was made under the Wisconsin Lemon Law. Pre-suit, General Motors offered our client thousands of dollars less than what he was entitled to, and imposed conditions on our client which are not required under the Wisconsin Lemon Law. Our client filed suit and the case settled for over $97,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $55,500).
  

• After having his 2004 Volkswagen Passat in for transmission repairs for over 40 days within one year after taking delivery, our client sought a refund from Volkswagen. Volkswagen required our client to sign a confidentiality statement before providing our client with a refund. Our client refused and filed suit. The case ultimately settled for $54,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $30,500).
  

• A small business owner purchased a 2004 Ford Excursion for his business. Within 6 weeks of taking delivery, he started to experience engine/surging problems with his vehicle and took the vehicle in no less than 9 times for repair. He requested that Ford repurchase the vehicle and refund his money back to him. Ford responded that they were unable to offer any assistance, so the consumer filed a lawsuit. He recovered $83,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $44,351).
  

• Within the first 9 months of ownership of a 2004 Mazda RX, our client had the vehicle in for service 5 times because the car would not start. He sought a refund from Mazda. Mazda imposed conditions on our client which were not required under the Wisconsin Lemon Law before a refund would be provided. Our client subsequently filed suit, which he later settled for over $50,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $31,195).
  

• A landscaper purchased a 2003 Chevrolet Kodiak C4500 and immediately began experiencing problems. Within the first year after purchase, the vehicle was out of service for over 70 days. After months of trying to resolve the matter with General Motors, our client decided to file suit. The matter was subsequently settled for $62,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $37,740).
  

• Our clients requested a replacement vehicle for their 2003 Ford Excursion because of ongoing problems with the vehicle’s engine, as well as an oil leak. Since Ford denied their request, we filed suit on their behalf. Our clients recovered $66,500, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $45,600).
  

• In 2000, in a case involving Saturn Corporation, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled that a manufacturer may not impose conditions on consumers not required by the Wisconsin Lemon Law. However, in subsequent claims, Saturn Corporation again tried to impose conditions on consumers not required by the Lemon Law, contrary to the Court's previous ruling. Our clients refused to the give in to the Saturn's conditions and filed suit. One client received $37,700, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $22,855) and another received over $29,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $17,643).
  

• Even though our clients' 2002 Land Rover was in for service for over 60 days within the first four months of ownership, Land Rover refused to provide our clients with a comparable vehicle. Shortly after filing suit, our clients were able to settle their claim for $75,800, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $47,995).
  

• Four months after purchasing a 2003 Harley Davidson, our client sent out a demand to Harley Davidson requesting a comparable motorcycle because his current motorcycle was in for service over 30 days since he purchased the bike. Since Harley Davidson did not comply with his request, the bike owner came to our office. We subsequently filed suit and recovered $29,700 for the client, plus attorney fees (original cost of motorcycle - $17,300).
  

• Even though Ford admitted that our client had his 2003 Lincoln Aviator in for transmission repairs on at least 5 occasions, and that the vehicle was out of service for repairs at least 64 days within the first year of ownership, Ford still refused to provide our client with a comparable vehicle to which he was entitled. Our client filed suit and recovered over $64,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $43,200).
  

• Ongoing engine problems, including the vehicle not starting and dying out, caused our client to seek a refund under the Wisconsin Lemon Law for its 2003 Ford F450. Ford failed to provide any relief to our client, who then filed suit. It was able to recover $73,500, plus attorney fees (original price of vehicle - $39,575).
  

• Our clients sought a refund from Honda for their 2002 Honda Odyssey which was in for service 45 days within the first year of ownership. Honda denied their request. Suit was then filed against Honda. Our clients received $42,000, plus attorney fees, in settlement (original price of vehicle - $25,031).
  

• A client, on his own, sought a replacement vehicle from Honda for his 2000 Honda Insight after numerous visits to Honda dealers for his check engine light coming on. Honda refused, so we filed suit on our client's behalf. Our client ended up recovering $33,500, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $18,750).
  

• After experiencing ongoing engine problems with his 2001 Chevrolet Silverado, our client requested that General Motors repurchase the vehicle back from him. The consumer filed suit and ultimately recovered $40,000, plus attorney fees (original price of vehicle - $26,130).
  

• Our client experienced hesitation/shifting/revving complaints with her 2002 Chevrolet Trailblazer. She then filed a notice with General Motors seeking a repurchase of her vehicle. General Motors denied her request. Our client then filed a lawsuit, which was later settled for over $43,500, plus attorney fees (original price of vehicle - $26,923).
  

• Our clients experienced various problems, including electrical problems, with their 2002 Chevrolet Trailblazer. GM denied their claim and our clients were forced to file suit. They recovered $50,130, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $34,156).
  

• Our client sought a comparable vehicle after his 2002 Chevrolet Corvette was in for service for over 40 days within the first year of ownership. General Motors reviewed the case, but determined that, in their opinion, the use, value and/or safety of the vehicle was not substantially impaired. Therefore, our client had no choice but to file suit. He ultimately recovered $76,000, plus attorney fees. (original cost of vehicle - $50,548).
  

• A client experienced a pulling problem with her 2002 Subaru Forester immediately upon taking delivery of the vehicle. After months of taking her vehicle in continuously for repairs, our client requested that Subaru provide her with a comparable vehicle. Subaru denied her request. Our client filed suit and the claim was eventually settled for $35,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $22,680).
  

• Air conditioning problems plagued a 2002 Subaru Impreza purchased by our clients. After months of waiting for Subaru to come up with a fix to repair the problems, our clients sought a refund for their vehicle. Subaru denied the request, so our clients filed suit. They recovered $36,000, plus attorney fees (original price of vehicle - $24,045).
  

• An airline pilot experienced brake, shimmy and vibration problems with his 2001 Toyota 4Runner. Despite numerous repair attempts, the problems continued. Our client requested that Toyota repurchase the vehicle, which did not happen. Suit was filed and our client was able to resolve the case for $45,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $30,096).
  

• Despite having their 2002 Volkswagen Jetta in for numerous repair visits for engine concerns within the first year after taking delivery, the problems continued. Our clients sought to have Volkswagen provide them with a comparable vehicle. Volkswagen failed to provide them with a vehicle that was comparable to their current one. Our clients sued. They were able to settle the case for $45,000, plus attorney fees (original cost of vehicle - $23,156).
  

• The owner of a 2000 Ford F250 had engine problems. His truck used oil, leaked oil and burnt oil. A lawsuit was filed against Ford under the Wisconsin Lemon Law. The case was settled prior to trial for $56,479.40, plus attorney fees (original cost of the vehicle - $32,700.00).
  
  

• A Jaguar owner paid $77,750.00 for a 2001 XKR. The doors didn't fit, the paint finish was defective and the brakes were faulty. Nevertheless, Jaguar Cars didn't feel that the XKR met the "presumption of the Wisconsin Lemon Law". The owner sued. The case was settled for $130,234.00, plus attorney fees.
  
  

• General Motors paid $56,500.00 for a 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe with multiple problems (original cost of the Tahoe - $34,900.00).