Search results
In Cummins, Inc. v. Superior Court (2005) 36 Cal.4th 478, California residents who purchased a motor home in Idaho brought suit under the Act against the manufacturers of the motor home and the engine alleging, among other things, that the engine was defective and thus violated the express warranty.
18 lip 2005 · Defendants moved for summary adjudication of the first cause of action on the ground that plaintiffs had purchased the motor home in Idaho, arguing that the Act applies only to vehicles purchased in California.
18 lip 2005 · United States State Supreme Court (California) Parties: CUMMINS, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Riverside County, Respondent; Edward D. Cox et al., Real Parties in Interest.
The complaint in this matter alleged the following facts. Cummins Corp., a California corporation formerly known as Valley Asbestos Company, installed asbestos containing products in California, and had received hundreds of asbestos bodily injury claims, including many lawsuits, based on exposure to its asbestos containing materials.
Facts Cummins Inc. imported crankshafts into the United States, claiming that they originated in Mexico and were entitled to preferential...
Cummins Inc. (plaintiff) sought to import crankshafts that it transformed into crankshafts in Mexico out of semifinished products originating from a non-NAFTA country.
16 sty 2024 · A class action was filed in federal court against Cummins Inc. after the company said Dec. 22, that it expected to record a $2.04 billion charge to resolve claims by the federal and California governments related to its emissions certification and compliance process.
