Spartanburg could be hub for Toyota suits

By FRED HORLBECK, Senior Staff Writer

A South Carolina law firm could find itself at the forefront of a consolidated class action against the world's largest automaker if a federal panel approves a U.S. district court in Spartanburg as the forum.

"With it being in South Carolina, we would expect to play a prominent role in the litigation," said John B. White Jr., a shareholder in the Spartanburg firm of Harrison, White, Smith, & Coggins.

The firm is one of 29 in 26 states that joined forces to file a motion for the transfer and consolidation of U.S. class actions against Toyota Motor Corp. into a single case, according to court documents.

The firms, which make up the Attorneys Toyota Action Consortium, filed the motion with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 18. White also filed a motion in the U.S. District Court of South Carolina.

Spartanburg is one of five possible alternatives ATAC proposed under 28 U.S.C. Sect. 1407. The others are the Southern District of West Virginia, the Northern District of Florida, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Central District of California.

The panel is expected to hold a hearing on March 25 in San Diego, White said.

Plaintiffs around the country have filed numerous suits, including wrongful-death actions, against Toyota. The company has recalled more than 8 million vehicles worldwide because of complaints sudden, unintended acceleration.

ATAC, which described itself in a press release as a "federation of consumer law firms filing actions against Toyota," isn't the only lawyer group seeking a consolidated action in a single forum.

Many other motions filed around the country propose a variety of forums, said Columbia lawyer Keith Babcock, who filed a class-action complaint against Toyota in January.

"At last count, I'm not sure how many, but there were a lot," he said.

Why Spartanburg?

White told Lawyers Weekly that Spartanburg would be a convenient forum for prospective witnesses and parties because of the location of Toyota's main U.S. offices.

Toyota's U.S. operations are primarily in the eastern half of the country, according to the company's Web site. Its U.S. sales headquarters is in California, but the holding company for its U.S. sales and manufacturing companies is based in New York and has offices in Washington, D.C., and Miami. Its North American engineering and manufacturing headquarters is in Kentucky.

"I consider this to be a more convenient forum that's central in South Carolina, with Miami being the far tip É and New York being the upper tip in terms of where the witnesses and the contacts are," White said.

Spartanburg's other advantages, White said, include its location between Atlanta and Charlotte; the Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport; and federal judicial facilities that are up to the task.

The panel looks for a "venue where facilities are appropriate to handle it, the court staff is appropriate, the judiciary is competent to handle the litigation and there's easy access to the particular city," White said.

White filed a class action in the South Carolina district court's Spartanburg Division last month. Now before U.S. District Judge R. Bryan Harwell, the case is Roberts v. Toyota Motor Corporation, et al., No. 7:10-cv-281-RBH. Lawyers John Simmons of Columbia and Fletcher V. Trammell of Houston are co-counsel on the case.

If the federal panel chooses Spartanburg, Judge Harwell would oversee the consolidated litigation, White said.

Harwell is a "very capable jurist with considerable experience in presiding over complex litigation. In particular, Judge Harwell has conducted pretrial proceedings in three class actions and one mass tort litigation," White said in a brief accompanying his motion.

In-state cases

Other than Roberts, the only South Carolina class action against the automaker is Wooten v. Toyota North America, Inc., et al., No. 3:10-cv-00229.

In the Wooten complaint, the Lexington County owner of a 2009 Toyota Camry LE asserted three causes of action: negligence, unjust enrichment and breach of express and implied warranty, Babcock said.

"Our lawsuit, as the complaint indicates, is focused on the problems with the Toyota and Lexus vehicles with the potential for sudden acceleration," he said. "We believe the problem is based on the electronic throttle-control system and that's what Toyota needs to fix. Our lawsuit is focused on getting Toyota to fix that and help the people with the cars that have a problem."

The case is pending before U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Perry Jr.

The Roberts complaint claims Toyota "created a serious and life-threatening safety condition" for drivers and passengers of Toyota-made cars subject to sudden, unintended acceleration.

The named plaintiff, a Spartanburg County resident, owns a 2007 Toyota Camry. He brought the action on behalf of a prospective class of American motorists that, according to the complaint, could number in the millions.

The Roberts plaintiff asserted claims for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and violation of consumer-protection statutes.

Both actions center on Toyota-made vehicles with the ETCS-Intelligent System, or ETCS-i, an electronic throttle-control system that the plaintiffs claim is the cause the problem.

The system sends electrical signals to a computer that controls the engine throttle, according to the complaints. While it's possible for such systems to send wrong signals or for interference to disrupt signals, most automakers combat such problems with brake-override system technology, also known as BOS, that lets drivers brake even at full throttle.

But not Toyota, the plaintiffs claim.

"To save production costs and increase profits, however, defendants intentionally did not install BOS in their vehicles equipped with ETCS-i, despite knowledge that ETCS-i was prone to sudden acceleration," the Roberts complaint says.

"Runaway acceleration events almost always begin suddenly and without warning," the Wooten complaint says. "The throttle opens so rapidly it is wide open before the driver has time to react; the automobile continues out of control despite desperate braking efforts by the driver; and, unless the driver manages to disengage the engine quickly, the likelihood of a catastrophic outcome is great."

A Toyota spokesperson said the company generally does not comment on pending litigation.

Recall repairs

S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster said in a press release that arranging recall repairs will now be easier for Toyota owners in South Carolina, as follows:

* Toyota has agreed to provide free pickup and return of recalled cars, as well as free rental cars or taxi fare, for car owners across the nation.

* Toyota is advising its dealers to address customer concerns on a case-by-case basis.

* Additional services are being provided to customers concerned about driving their vehicles before the repairs are completed. They may include: (1) expediting scheduling of the repair; (2) picking up the vehicle from the consumer's home and dropping it off when repairs are complete; (3) driving the customer to the dealership or workplace; and (4) providing alternate transportation, such as a rental car, loaner vehicle or taxi reimbursement.

* The company will reimburse dealers for the expenses.

* Owners in need of recall repairs should first contact their dealer.