Kia has asked an appellate court to settle a dispute in an ongoing class action lawsuit over allegedly defective windshields.
The lawsuit began in a California Central court in 2020 after Yandery Sanchez alleged that Kia knowingly sold defective windshields for Kia Telluride vehicles that cracked, chipped or fractured spontaneously. Another plaintiff, Margret Ritzler, filed a similar lawsuit over Kia Telluride windshields in April 20203. The court combined the two suits later that year.
Kia moved for summary judgment in early 2026. Court documents show that the judge granted summary judgment on three class members’ breach-of-express-warranty claims but denied it on all other claims. These claims include:
- The existence of a common windshield defect;
- Violations of consumer protection and anti-fraud laws;
- Implied warranty breaches and all but three express warranty breaches; and
- Violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
Kia took issue with the denial’s legal reasoning and has asked that an appellate court review the ruling.
“Are class members required to prove that Kia knew, at the time of sale, of the alleged windshield defect and that it posed an unreasonable safety risk [instead of one or the other]?” asks a motion for interlocutory review filed May 26. “In Kia’s view, the answer is yes.”
The motion claims that a higher court must review the decision before the case can proceed because the lawsuit hinges on that question and because Kia has substantial legal reasoning to disagree with the judge. The motion also argues that if the higher court agrees that class members must prove that Kia knew of both the alleged defect and the alleged risk, the lawsuit would be streamlined.
“Obtaining an answer from the [appellate court] may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation because an affirmative answer would resolve a critical legal question that will inevitably arise in the context of jury instructions and other disputes before, during and after trial,” the motion says.
According to court records, a hearing for the motion has been scheduled for July 31. The final pretrial conference for the lawsuit is scheduled on Nov. 6, and the trial will be held Feb. 22, 2027, court records say.
