Product Liability

Ram 2025 Trucks Dangerous Engine Defect Class Action

Ram 2025 Trucks Dangerous Engine Defect Class Action — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Case Overview

The lawsuit was initiated by Charlene Norberg and Tim Craig against FCA US LLC, alleging that the automaker sold 2025 model year Ram 1500 trucks containing a dangerous engine defect. The complaint points to a latent issue in vehicles equipped with 3.0L Hurricane engines that were distributed across the United States.

The plaintiffs contend that FCA failed to disclose a defect in the engine control module and/or powertrain control module. This alleged defect can cause issues such as persistent diagnostic trouble codes, check engine lights, drivability problems, and loss of engine power or power brakes. The claims involve breaches of warranty, fraudulent concealment, and violations of state and federal consumer laws.

The plaintiffs are seeking to represent current or former owners and/or lessees of the 2025 model year Ram 1500 truck in the United States. The lawsuit is currently filed in the Michigan federal court, and the plaintiffs are seeking class certification, damages, and a jury trial.

Who May Qualify

Current or former owners and/or lessees of a 2025 model year Ram 1500 truck in the United States.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the alleged defect in the Ram 1500 trucks?

The class action lawsuit alleges a latent defect in the 3.0L Hurricane engines of the 2025 Ram 1500 models. This defect is said to be in the engine control module and/or powertrain control module, potentially causing issues like check engine lights, drivability problems, and loss of power.

What are the dangers associated with this engine defect?

The lawsuit states that when the defect manifests, it can cause the Ram 1500 trucks to stall, hesitate, misfire, or lose power unexpectedly while driving, which poses a danger to the occupants and other vehicles on the road.

Who is represented in this lawsuit?

The plaintiffs are represented by E. Powell Miller and Dennis A. Lienhardt of The Miller Law Firm P.C., and Matthew D. Schelkopf and Joseph B. Kenney of Sauder Schelkopf LLC.

Related Cases

Mead Johnson Infant Formula NEC Lawsuit — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Mead Johnson Infant Formula NEC Lawsuit

Past
Product Liability
A jury in Illinois rejected claims that Mead Johnson's infant formula caused a premature baby to develop necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The lawsuit alleges the company failed to warn about the risks associated with its product.
$110M Transamerica Life Insurance Class Action Settlement — Product Liability class action lawsuit

$110M Transamerica Life Insurance Class Action Settlement

Past
Product Liability
Transamerica Life Insurance agreed to a $110 million settlement to resolve claims regarding its failure to properly credit certain cash value increases on specific life insurance policies. The settlement applies to policyholders who owned or owned a universal life insurance policy that was active on January 1, 2016, and was identified by certain product names or attribute codes.
Clorox Contaminated Cleaner Class Action — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Clorox Contaminated Cleaner Class Action

Current
Product Liability
A class action lawsuit alleges that The Clorox Company sold scented cleaning products, such as Mistolin and Lestoil, that were potentially contaminated with the bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The plaintiffs claim the company failed to warn consumers about this danger, especially for those with weakened immune systems.