Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ford Credit to Exit Auto Leasing in New York and Rhode Island
In the May issue, author Pauline Clark discussed the Rhode Island Supreme Court's decision in Oliveira v. Lombardi, 794 A.2d 453 (R.I. 2002), holding that automobile leasing companies may be held liable under the state's vicarious liability statute for the negligence of drivers operating motor vehicles titled in the leasing companies' name. In a clear response to this and other similar cases, Ford Credit has announced that it plans to exit automobile leasing in Rhode Island in October 2003 and in New York after July 9, 2003.
The company noted specifically that Rhode Island's vicarious liability law has already caused finance companies to resolve litigation by making 'significant payouts.' It is hoped, however, that the pullout will not be permanent. Putting the issue squarely in the lap of state lawmakers, Ford credit regional manager, June Awad stated, 'we realize that the Rhode Island legislature is considering legislation that would remedy the situation. Ford Credit fully and actively supports this legislation and, if it is signed into law, we will continue to lease there.'
The company also cited the failure of the New York Legislature to act on a vicarious liability bill that would have eliminated the legal exposure of finance companies. A.J. Wagner, Ford Credit's executive vice president of North America, expressed his disappointment that the New York Legislature recently adjourned without addressing the proposed bill, stating that New York may soon be the only state in the nation where leasing is not an option for consumers.' Recently, a New York jury rendered a $1 million verdict against Ford Credit after a young girl brought suit after her father ran her over with his leased car while she was sunbathing.
Three states, New York, Rhode Island and Connecticut, had been the only ones in the nation to allow vicarious liability against finance companies, but the Connecticut legislature recently passed a bill to limit vicarious liability.
Adam Schlagman is editor-in-chief of this newsletter.
In the May issue, author Pauline Clark discussed the
The company noted specifically that Rhode Island's vicarious liability law has already caused finance companies to resolve litigation by making 'significant payouts.' It is hoped, however, that the pullout will not be permanent. Putting the issue squarely in the lap of state lawmakers, Ford credit regional manager, June Awad stated, 'we realize that the Rhode Island legislature is considering legislation that would remedy the situation. Ford Credit fully and actively supports this legislation and, if it is signed into law, we will continue to lease there.'
The company also cited the failure of the
Three states,
Adam Schlagman is editor-in-chief of this newsletter.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.