Flaherty  |  Sensabaugh  |  Bonasso   PLLC

Charleston  |  Morgantown  |  Wheeling   304-345-0200

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia Upholds Circuit Court’s Granting of Motion to Dismiss

In a memorandum decision, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia recently affirmed the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint alleging multiple products liability claims against a Defendant automaker stemming from the failure of an engine component in the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

In upholding the circuit court’s decision, the Supreme Court found no error in the dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Specifically, the Court found Plaintiff did not give the required statutory notice of his intent to sue under the West Virginia Deceptive Trade Practices Act and determined that Plaintiff’s breach of implied warranty of merchantability claim was filed beyond the statute of limitations provided by the West Virginia Uniform Commercial Code. The Court further found no error in the circuit court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s strict liability cause of action because the alleged damages were to the vehicle’s engine only and did not occur as part of a “sudden calamitous event,” which under West Virginia law would permit recovery in strict liability.

Defendant was represented by Flaherty Attorneys Mike Bonasso, Nate Tawney, and Philip Reale, II.

Disclaimer: Case summaries, reports of past results and individual lawyer biographies on this website describe past matters handled for clients of the Firm. These descriptions are meant only to provide information to the public about the activities and experience of our lawyers. They are not intended as a guarantee that the same or similar results can be obtained in every matter undertaken by our lawyers. You must not assume that a similar result can be obtained in a legal matter of interest to you. The outcome of a particular matter can depend on a variety of factors—including the specific factual and legal circumstances, the ability of opposing counsel, and, often, unexpected developments beyond the control of any client or lawyer.