In Grodzitsky v. American Honda Motor Co, Inc, No. 18-55417 (9th Cir. April 29, 2020), a divided federal appeals court upheld a District Judge’s decision to decline to certify a class of consumers who alleged their Honda Pilots had defective window mechanisms that could cause the windows to suddenly drop into the door frame. By a 2-1 vote, the 9th Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs, in seeking to establish their vehicles shared a common design defect, relied on a “fatally flawed,” unreliable opinion from an expert witness.
Plaintiffs relied on the expert opinion of an engineer in seeking to certify a class of anyone who had leased or owned 2003?2008 Honda Pilots. The engineer, Glenn Akhavein, concluded the mechanism in the vehicles sold by American Honda Motor Co. that controls moving a window up or down was not sufficiently durable when exposed to certain frequencies of vibrations. But Los Angeles District Court Judge Stephen Wilson previously excluded his opinion, saying it was based on a “half-baked” view the mechanisms were defective because they did not last the life of the vehicles. During a deposition, Akhavein said window regulators “shouldn’t fail ever” and “should work for the life of the car.” Wilson said Akhavein provided no industry standards or studies to substantiate that claim.
On appeal, the plaintiffs argued Akhavein’s opinion was reliable and premised on his determination the regulators were defective because they were not durable enough to withstand force during driving. The 9th Circuit affirmed, stating that the expert’s opinion was properly excluded on the grounds that he had an “overly expansive standard for a design defect” and believed the window mechanisms should last forever. “In the absence of the report, the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate commonality, as the remaining evidence consisted solely of highly individualized complaints,” Judge Rawlinson wrote.
As for the plaintiffs? argument, Rawlinson called that a “recasting” of Akhavein’s opinion, which suffered from other “methodological flaws.” He said Akhavein failed to identify a common solution to the defect and examined just 26 Honda Pilot window regulators to prove a common defect in the over 400,000 regulators the proposed class encompassed.