Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that under Illinois law only a consumer buyer who suffered a personal injury may satisfy § 2-607 by filing suit
• holding that express warranties or promises by the manufacturer provide privity for a consumer to sue under an implied warranty theory under the MMWA but not under the UCC
• holding that dismissal was appropriate because plaintiffs suffered only economic damages and did not provide pre-litigation notice
• holding that notice is unnecessary where the seller is “somehow apprised of the trouble with the particular product purchased by a partic- ular buyer”
• holding that dismissal was appropriate because plaintiffs suffered only economic damages and did not provide pre-litigation notice
• holding that the notice requirement is satisfied “only where the manufacturer is somehow apprised of the trouble with the particular product purchased by a particular buyer.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1995-09-29· cited 15×