CHICAGO – Belleville lawyer Brian Flynn suffered no injury when he bought a Jeep with an entertainment system like one that experts used to seize control of a vehicle, U.S. Seventh Circuit appellate judges ruled on July 14.
They affirmed District Judge Staci Yandle, who found Flynn lacked standing to lead a statewide class action against Jeep maker Fiat Chrysler.
Chief Circuit Judge Diane Sykes found Flynn and three companion plaintiffs relied on allegations and argument rather than point to evidence of actual injury.
The other plaintiffs would have represented classes in Missouri and Michigan.
Sykes found that other than experts who seized control of a vehicle under controlled conditions, no one successfully hacked a Chrysler vehicle.
Wired magazine published a report on the hacking experiment in 2015, and plaintiffs sued Fiat Chrysler two weeks later.
They also sued Harman International Industries, which produced the entertainment system under the name of UConnect.
They alleged risk of physical harm, risk of fear and anxiety, decrease in market value, and overpayment.
Former district judge Michael Reagan dismissed the risk allegations and allowed the economic allegations.
In 2018, at a hearing on class certification, counsel for the plaintiffs acknowledged that they lacked data to support a theory of diminished value.
That left only the overpayment claim, but that claim alone involved about 100,000 vehicles at thousands of dollars per vehicle.
Reagan certified statewide classes against Fiat Chrysler in Illinois and Missouri, and a Michigan class against Fiat Chrysler and Harman International.
He appointed the Armstrong Teasdale firm of St. Louis as class counsel along with Christopher Cueto and Lloyd M. Cueto of Belleville.
Reagan set trial but never held it.
He retired in 2019, and the clerk assigned District Judge Nancy Rosenstengel.
She recused herself and the clerk assigned Yandle.
After discovery closed, Fiat Chrysler filed motions to decertify the class, grant summary judgment, or dismiss for lack of standing.
Yandle granted the third motion, finding she had an independent obligation at each stage of the proceedings to ensure that she had subject matter jurisdiction.
“No hacker has remotely accessed the system, no hacker has seized control of a vehicle’s operations, and no consumer has ever been injured,” Yandle wrote.
She found it unclear whether UConnect was defective at all.
She found plaintiffs didn’t allege that UConnect didn’t work, that they experienced problems related to it, that they were unwilling to drive their vehicles, or that they sold or traded their vehicles at a loss due to alleged defects.
“The allegation that defendants wrongfully induced them to purchase their vehicles by concealing the alleged defect in the UConnect and that their vehicles are worth substantially less than they would be without the alleged defect is conclusory and unsupported,” she wrote.
She found they received what they bargained for and didn’t plausibly allege they were financially harmed.
On appeal, in 2020, Sykes heard oral argument along with circuit judges Michael Kanne and Amy St. Eve.
It took 21 months to reach a decision, and in the final month Kanne died.
Sykes and St. Eve issued the decision as a quorum.
“When litigation moves beyond the pleading stage and standing is challenged as a factual matter, a plaintiff can no longer rely on mere allegations of injury,” Sykes wrote.
“He must provide evidence of a legally cognizable injury in fact.”
When the case returns to Yandle, she must decide whether plaintiffs owe Fiat Chrysler and Harman International about $100,000 each for transcripts.
Fiat Chrysler and Harman International filed bills of costs after Yandle dismissed the case, and she reserved a ruling pending resolution of the appeal.
Stephen D’Aunoy and six colleagues at Thompson Coburn in St. Louis represented Fiat Chrysler.
The Milwaukee firm of Foley and Lardner represented Harman International.