Coupled Products v. Navistar – Our client, Coupled Products, brought a breach of contract claim against automotive manufacturer Navistar. Navistar counter sued. We were retained to represent Coupled at trial against two prominent national law firms. After a two-and-a-half-week trial, the jury awarded Coupled all of the damages Coupled sought – to the penny – and rejected Navistar’s counterclaims. We then pursued attorney fees, costs and interests for our client, and after numerous days of evidentiary hearing, the court entered a final judgment including attorney fees, costs and interest. The case settled before the appeal.
With an office in the heart of the automotive alley, Young, Garcia & Quadrozzi regularly provides litigation support and pre-litigation counseling and advice to sophisticated automotive suppliers both in our region, and those around the world doing business in the automotive sphere. Often these disputes begin with pre-litigation demands to the automotive companies directly or to a tier two or three supplier. Those that cannot be resolved pre-litigation often proceed through extraordinary relief such as a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction. The Firm has decades of experience in this unique area and has an outstanding record of success for its clients seeking relief.
Multimatic v. Faurecia – Faurecia, a French automotive supplier, asked Multimatic, a Canadian automotive supplier, to supply parts to Faurecia for eventual use on a Chrysler line of vehicles. Multimatic designed a part and submitted that design to Faurecia after Faurecia signed a confidentiality agreement with Multimatic, promising to limit disclosure on this design. Nevertheless, Faurecia disclosed the design to one of Multimatic’s competitors. This competitor eventually replaced Multimatic. Multimatic brought a breach of contract lawsuit against Faurecia in Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The Firm represented Multimatic. After one week of trial, the jury awarded the full amount of damages sought by Multimatic, $10 million, and asked the Court whether it could impose additional damages.
Algonquin Automotive v. Ford Motor Company – The Firm successfully represented Algonquin, a Tier-1 supplier, against Ford based on Ford’s breach of a supply agreement whereby Algonquin created, developed and manufactured a hard tonneau cover for Ford’s special Harley Davidson edition of its well-known F-150 vehicle. Following arbitration hearings spanning more than a year, the Firm secured a substantial seven-figure award.