U.S. Supreme Court denies cert. in washing machine class actions

Fotolia Washing MachineThe U.S. Supreme Court gave consumers a break by allowing them to proceed with class-action lawsuits alleging that millions of front-loading washing machines they bought suffered from mold or musty odors.

By refusing to hear the appeals in three lawsuits, the court allowed claims against Whirlpool Corp., Sears Holdings Corp., and a unit of Germany’s BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeraete GmbH to move forward as class actions in lower courts.

Business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers had urged the Supreme Court to hear the companies’ appeals.  The court has in recent years cut back on the ability of plaintiffs to pursue class actions, which can lead to bigger jury awards and settlements than individual lawsuits, in cases against AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

At issue in the washing-machine cases was whether claims about alleged defects in Whirlpool washers, Kenmore-brand washers made for Sears by Whirlpool, and BSH Home Appliance Corp washers were similar enough to be heard at the same time.

Consumers said that the machines did not clean themselves properly, while the companies said only a small number of machines had problems.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago had allowed consumers to pursue respective claims as groups against Whirlpool in Ohio, and Sears in six U.S. states.  Those courts’ initial rulings for the consumers were later thrown out after the Supreme Court ruled for Comcast last March over cable TV subscribers who accused it of overcharging them. The court said the proposed Comcast class was too diverse.

The 6th Circuit and 7th Circuit nonetheless later ruled for the washing-machine plaintiffs a second time.  Sears had said the 7th Circuit decision by Judge Richard Posner “opens the door to class actions based on any mass-produced product’s failure to meet expectations of a handful of consumers, no matter how few other buyers had the same problem.”  Another appeals court, the 9th Circuit, had refused to let BSH appeal a December 2012 ruling by a federal judge in Santa Ana, California, allowing a class action against that company to go ahead.

The cases are BSH Home Appliances Corp v. Cobb et al, 13-138; Sears, Roebuck & Co v. Butler et al, 13-430; and Whirlpool Corp v. Glazer et al, 13-431.

Steve Larson
An experienced trial lawyer who handles both hourly and contingent fee cases, Steve has expertise in class actions, antitrust litigation, securities litigation, corporate disputes, intellectual property disputes, unfair competition claims, and disputes involving family wealth. Steve regularly represents individuals and businesses in federal and state court and has obtained class-wide recovery in multiple class actions. A veteran practitioner, Steve's clients value his creative approach to resolving complex litigation matters.


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on google
Share on linkedin

Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog does not constitute legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this blog.