Subaru Motions to Dismiss Class Action Lawsuit

Subaru of America Inc. (Subaru) filed a reply brief to further support the company’s motions to dismiss an ongoing class action lawsuit, originally filed by Christine Powell against the auto manufacturer for allegedly defective windshields. The suit also added 15 new plaintiffs in February 2020.

According to Subaru’s reply brief, the company “shall move before the United States District Court for an order dismissing the complaint of plaintiffs … pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure” on July 6, 2020.

“Subaru will rely on its supplemental brief, and, by agreement of the parties, the incorporated-by-reference papers filed in support of the Subaru Defendants’ motion to dismiss the master amended complaint,” a portion of Subaru’s reply brief reads.

In March 2020 Subaru filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction. In its most recent motion, Subaru notes several “errors” the plaintiffs have made.

“Plaintiffs make several errors of law and mischaracterize certain Subaru and Subaru Corporation arguments in opposing the Subaru defendants’ motions to dismiss the consolidated class action complaint and the Zaback complaint. Indeed, once those errors and mischaracterizations are corrected, much of the plaintiffs’ opposition rests on little more than a recapitulation of the vague and unsupported allegations in the complaints,” a portion of Subaru’s dismissal brief reads.

Neither of the complaints allege that the defective vehicles contain the same types of windshields; that the same suppliers provide the windshields; nor do they allege the windshields are positioned in the different model year vehicles in the same manner, according to Subaru’s reply brief.

Subaru also notes the plaintiffs have failed to make allegations regarding the alleged windshield defect with a degree of specificity that would enable anyone else to believe the alleged problem is shared across differing model-year vehicles.

“As previously noted, that similarities exist between different model-year vehicles cannot confer standing upon plaintiffs who have never owned those vehicles,” a portion of Subaru’s reply brief reads.


The suit alleges Subaru was “manufacturing, marketing and selling new vehicles with defective and dangerous windshields that were spontaneously and/or unreasonably cracking, chipping and otherwise breaking.”

According to Subaru’s dismissal brief, the drivers can’t sue over models they didn’t drive. The plaintiffs, according to court documents, have stated the auto manufacturer failed to inform them of the alleged dangerous defect and refused to cover the replacement cost. Subaru however has stated the claims “fail as a matter of law due in part to the overly broad class.”

According to the plaintiffs consolidated complaint, the vehicles represented in the case include 2017-2020 Subaru Forester, 2017-2020 Subaru Outback, 2017-2020 Subaru Crosstrek, 2017-2020 Subaru Legacy and 2017-2020 Subaru Impreza vehicles (collectively known as class vehicles). The plaintiffs are seeking replacement windshields and reimbursements for their repair costs, or for Subaru to buy their cars back, according to the consolidated complaint.

According to court documents, Subaru stated no plaintiff has ever purchased, leased, or owned a: Legacy of any model year; any 2017 Crosstrek, Forester, or Impreza; any 2019 Impreza; or any 2020 Crosstrek, Forester, or Impreza.

The plaintiffs have not responded to Subaru’s latest dismissal brief. Look to a future edition of glassBYTEs for more information on this suit.

This article is from glassBYTEs™, the free e-newsletter that covers the latest auto glass industry news. Click HERE to sign up—there is no charge. Interested in a deeper dive? Free subscriptions to Auto Glass Repair and Replacement (AGRR) magazine in print or digital format are available. Subscribe at no charge HERE.

This entry was posted in glassBYTEs Original Story and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Subaru Motions to Dismiss Class Action Lawsuit

  1. Pingback: Subaru’s Lawyers Say Defective Windshield Suit Should be Dismissed |

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *