EricM

In another thread a couple days ago, somebody mentioned that (unlike with Saleens) there's an ownership transfer between Ford and Roush before the original owner ever buys the car. But I don't know if that's how it really works. Maybe some Roush owner can confirm. If that's how Roush does it, then Ford did a transaction with Roush, and the owner bought a pre-owned Mustang... or I guess a new Roush, if they re-do the MSO somehow.

03GTVert

Nope, The way I understand it (I worked for a law firm for 6 years... as a computer nerd, not a lawyer!) when you sue someone and ask for "damages" you are saying that you were "harmed" by the value of the damages asked for. The fact that you have to pay a lawyer is irrelevent as far as the court is concerned. You can sue for attorneys fees too, but those aren't "damages".

For instance, you get rear ended. Your "damages" total $10,000 to your car and $15,000 in medical bills and you make up... er... calculate a reasonable compensation for "pain and suffering" of another $25,000. The total "damages" you would sue for is $25,000, even if your attorney is going to take $20,000+ of that money.

cenotaph

These people are insane. And stupid.

Am I getting this right? They spent >60K on a black mustang with a crappy supercharger and plastic molding held on by 3M tape?!

There's a sucker born every minute.

Bob D.

These folks may be crazy, and I personally dislike the lawsuit-as-solution-for-every-shortcoming-in-one's-life approach, but there are several precedents for this. The first I could find quick confirmation of was the 1988 BMW M5. When BMW of North America first anounced the E28 M5 in late 1986, production was said to be limited to 500 cars. By the time production ended in November 1987, however, almost triple that number had been produced. A class action lawsuit was filed against BMW by E28 M5 owners who claimed that the collector value of their cars was diminished by the greater volume. The company settled the case out of court by giving the owners a substantial rebate on the purchase of a new BMW, and articles at the time felt the owners would have fared even better had teh case gone to trial.

IWinULose

Uhm, actually, that applies to most of the people in this section, then. Call me insane, or stupid, but I also have a black mustag with a supercharger and molding and wing held on with 3m tape....

unclemilti

Yeah..I don't believe for a moment that this is just going to be "dismissed" as someone stated above.

This is the legal system we're talking about here. Things that should be resolved with some common sense are pushed aside to run the clock for the lawyers.

Plus, as you show..there are precedents already out there.

Thanks to a corrupt legal system- its usually cheaper to settle out of court or before the lawyers get so involved that theres no turning back.

elburrito99

Just to address how the action could be summarily dismissed, as I noted above, there are two procedural methods for this to happen well before going to trial.

First, Ford/Roush will likely file a "demurrer" (or motion to dismiss) the lawsuit based solely on the allegations contained in the complaint (i.e., no outside evidence will be considered). Unless the owners can/do allege in their complaint that Ford/Roush actually promised they would produce only 100 Black Jacks ever (regardless of model year, etc.), then a judge may throw out the case on demurrer.

Second, if the demurrer is not successful, the parties will go through the process of discovery (document productions, depositions, written interrogatories, etc.) and again try to get the lawsuit tossed by filing a "motion for summary judgment." At this point, the court will throw out the case unless the owners can actually present uncontested evidence that (a) Ford/Roush actually promised they would produce only 100 Black Jacks ever, (b) this representation was breached or was false, and (c) the owners were somehow damaged by Ford/Roush's conduct (i.e., that their cars dropped in value as a result of the additional 100 cars produced).

That's a quick summary of the procedural workings of our country's "corrupt" legal system, in which I work and which I believe functions better than any other legal system currently in place thorughout the world. It's not perfect, but it's still the best.

Stu, Esq.

S281SC

Just a couple quick notes...

Roush Press Release Feb 19,2007, which states:

Jack Roush had the vision, and the ROUSH Stage 3 BlackJack Mustang is the result. He personally developed the content of this black-on-black car, and a prototype build was his vehicle of choice while at many of the NASCAR Nextel Cup events during the 2006 season. That particular Mustang recently ended up on the Barrett-Jackson auction block as an extremely collectible one-of-a-kind car. Now, ROUSH Performance is set to offer a limited edition run of 100 ROUSH Stage 3 BlackJack Mustangs, all of which have been pre-sold through their ROUSH-authorized Ford dealer base.
and
To further validate the 100 cars, each will come with a Certificate of Authenticity signed by Jack Roush.

To a "reasonable person", that sure sounds like a total run of 100 cars, not "100 only for each model year"...

I'll bet this gets settled before it ever sees a courtroom anyway, much like the previous BMW "limited edition" case.

When BMW of North America first announced the E28 M5 in late 1986, production was said to be limited to 500 cars. But by the time production ended in November 1987, however, almost triple that number had been produced. Thus, a class action lawsuit was filed against BMW by E28 M5 owners who claimed that the collector's value of their cars was diminished by the greater volume.

In 1993, the company settled the case by giving these owners a rebate on the purchase of a new BMW. The settlement provided the 1,233 purchasers or lessees of M5 BMWs a coupon, good for thirty months, entitling the bearer to a $4,000 discount toward the purchase or lease price of certain models of new BMW automobiles.

elburrito99

I believe the BMW case involved tripling the # of cars in a single model year. That's a fairly indefensible maneuver.

The most likely result is settlement, since that will likely save everyone $$$ in the long run. But I still think a worthwhile attorney could get this case tossed.

ChiDiddy

95% of cases filed never make it to court. They are usually settled outside of it. I doubt this will be any different.