Kramer, et al v. Toyota Motor Corp., et al, No. 12-55050 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs, Prius owners, brought a putative class action suit against Toyota, alleging that they experienced defects in their anti-lock brake systems (ABS), resulting in increased stopping distances. On appeal, Toyota sought review of the district court's denial of their motion to compel arbitration. The court concluded that Toyota could not compel plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims. The district court had the authority to decide whether Toyota, a nonsignatory to the Purchase Agreement, could compel arbitration. The court discerned no reason that plaintiffs should be equitably estopped from avoiding arbitration in this case. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Arbitration. The panel affirmed the district court’s order denying a motion to compel arbitration. The panel held that Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. may not compel plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims. The panel also held the district court had the authority to decide whether Toyota, a nonsignatory to several purchase agreements with arbitration provisions between plaintiffs and various Toyota dealerships, may compel arbitration. Finally, the panel could discern no reason that the plaintiffs should be equitably estopped from avoiding arbitration in this case.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.