Loyola Consumer Law Review

Volume 8 | Issue 1 Article 15

1995

Automobile Lemon Laws: An AnnotatedBibliographyLouis J. Sirico Jr.Prof., Villanova University School of Law.

Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lclr

Part of the Consumer Protection Law Commons

This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola Consumer Law Reviewby an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact law-library@luc.edu.

Recommended CitationLouis J. Sirico Jr. Automobile Lemon Laws: An Annotated Bibliography, 8 Loy. Consumer L. Rev. 39 (1995).Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lclr/vol8/iss1/15

FEATURE ARTICLE

Automobile Lemon Laws:An Annotated Bibliographyby Louis J. Sirico, Jr.

INTRODUCTION

Just over a decade ago, the Connecticutlegislature started a trend when it became the firststate to enact a lemon law.1 Since then, all 50states and the District of Columbia have promul-gated some form of a lemon law.2 Lemon lawstypically require an automobile manufacturer toreplace a defective automobile or refund its pur-chase price if the defect has not been repairedafter a specified number of attempts or if the carhas been in disrepair a certain cumulative num-ber of calendar days.3 Lemon laws were enacted,in large part, to give defective car owners moreprotection than they had received under the Uni-form Commercial Code and the Magnuson MossWarranty Act (hereinafter "UCC" and"MMWA"). 4 Several articles and books detailthe development of lemon laws in the UnitedStates and the laws' impact on consumers andthe automobile industry.

This bibliography was prepared to assistlegal practitioners who are researching statelemon laws or handling defective automobilecases. 5 The secondary sources cited are legalpublications including law re-view articles, comments, and Louis . Siriccase notes. They each are ac- School of La

companied by a brief summary University of

explaining the contents of the Renee Langh

article.6 The citations have been sity School oj

arranged by subject heading in a Professor Sir

manner that should facilitate the location ofsources. Sources such as court decisions, news-paper articles, and bar journal reports are not in-cluded. Legal indexes and databases can be usedto locate those materials. It is the author's wishthat this bibliography serve as a starting pointfor research in this area. Hopefully, this articlewill yield positive results for those who utilizeit.

AUTOMOBILE LEMON LAWS: An

Annotated Bibliography7

I. Background

1. Barbara E. Herring, Comment, Sweeten-ing the Fate of the "Lemon" Owner: Californiaand Connecticut Pass Legislation Dealing withDefective New Cars, 14 U. Tol. L. Rev. 341(1983), 33 pages.

Barbara Herring discusses the early yearsof lemon law legislation. She recounts the diffi-culties consumers encountered upon purchasinga defective automobile. She reviews leadingcourt cases that demonstrate consumers' frustra-

o, Jr. is a professor of law at Villanova Universityv. Professor Sirico received a J.D. degree from the'Texas School of Law in 1972.ey received a J.D. degree from Villanova Univer-Law in 1994 and assisted with this article.

ico wishes to thank Lance Vines for his assistance.

Feature Articles 0 391995-1996

tion with the few remedies available to themunder the UCC and the MMWA.

She cites the original, unsuccessful at-tempts of the California legislature to amend itswarranty law to better protect buyers of defec-tive cars. She also discusses the opposition thatConnecticut legislators faced; an opposition thatultimately forced a compromise on the Connecti-cut lemon law. Herring then lists the major pro-visions of the two lemon laws and compares sev-eral aspects of each. She speculates on the prob-able effect of lemon laws on consumers, manu-facturers, and dealers. She concludes that suchlaws will produce consistent, speedy resolutionsto defective auto disputes and will foster bettercommunication between the parties involved inautomobile transactions.

2. Robert D.Honigman, The New "LemonLaws": Expanding UCC Remedies, 17 U.C.C.L.J. 116 (1984), 12 pages.

Robert Honigman tracks the rapid growthof state lemon laws. He questions their provi-sions, describing the differences between lemonlaws and the UCC. He argues that the numer-ous state lemon laws were a response to the per-vasiveness of poor quality automobiles and in-adequate warranty service at that time.

The author covers the basic, commonprovisions of these statutes. He then comparesthe basic lemon law provisions to those of theUCC and the MMWA, noting the differing stan-dards for what constitutes warranty defect, ve-hicle use after rescission, and reasonable timefor repair. His article is followed by a reprint ofthe Connecticut lemon law and a table that chartshow other state lemon laws differ from the Con-necticut lemon law.

3. Mary B. Kegley and Janine S. Hiller,"Emerging" Lemon Car Laws, 24 Am. Bus. L.J.

87 (1986), 19 pages.Mary Kegley and Janine Hiller explain

that purchasers of defective new cars, left with-out lemon laws, were frustrated by disclaimersand limitations of UCC permitted remedies, ob-stacles in exercising their rights under theMMWA, and the lack of a refund provision inthe MMWA for the individual purchase amountsof defective cars. The authors review case lawto demonstrate that the UCC provisions for re-jecting and revoking acceptance can be an ef-fective means of obtaining a purchase price re-fund. They caution, however, that these rem-edies are highly fact-sensitive, making their avail-ability unpredictable.

The authors chronicle the advent oflemon laws, discussing the Connecticut lemonlaw, the first lemon law passed in the UnitedStates, and comparing state lemon laws. Theydiscuss problem areas for lemon law legislation,including a review of a federal case declaringTexas' lemon law unconstitutional. They con-clude that lemon laws provide consumers a muchneeded remedy for their complaints.

4. Margaret S. Rigg, Lemon Laws, 18 Clear-inghouse Rev. 1147 (1985), 17 pages.

Margarent Rigg discusses lemon laws asthey have developed across the country. She dis-cusses the advantages state lemon laws presentover the UCC and the MMWA. She also pointsout the critics' arguments that lemon laws con-tain many uncertainties and are too limited inscope.

Rigg takes an in-depth look at each ofthe typical provisions of a state lemon law.Throughout the discussion, she notes variationsbetween the state laws and variations from theUCC and the MMWA. She then gives helpfulinformation to practitioners, such as appropriate

40 9 Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

steps for manufacturers and consumers to takeand possible constructions of the statutes' pro-visions. She suggests theories of liability underthe UCC, and she also states unfair and decep-tive trade practices acts and common law mis-representation and concealment. She concludeswith a list of cites to existing lemon laws.

5. Elizabeth E. Vollmar, Note, Lemon Laws:Putting the Squeeze on Automobile Manufactur-ers, 61 Wash. U. L.Q. 1125 (1984), 38 pages.

Elizabeth Vollmar illustrates the prob-lems consumers faced in the early 1980s whendealing with defective automobiles. She reviewsthe provisions of the UCC and the MMWA withrespect to rejection of goods, revocation of ac-ceptance, use of goods after a defect is discov-ered, and vertical privity requirements. She high-lights the barriers these remedies present to au-tomobile consumers.

She discusses the goals, purposes, andpolicies underlying state lemon laws. To makelemon laws most helpful to buyers of defectivecars, she urges the judiciary to construe the stat-utes in a manner consistent with the intent of thelegislature. Such interpretations, contendsVollmar, would effectively reform the automo-bile warranty system. The appendix contains areprint of three manufacturers' automobile war-ranties and the Connecticut lemon law. Also, atable is included that charts general provisionsof several state lemon laws.

6. Curtis R. Reitz, What You Should Knowabout State "Lemon Laws", 34-3 Prac. Law. 83(1988) 4 pages.

Curtis Reitz discusses the developmentof state lemon laws. Reitz begins with the firstwave of statutes seven years after Congressionalpassage of the 1975 MMWA. He explains howthe lemon laws relate to warranty law under the

UCC and MMWA. Reitz also explains lemonlaw definitions, presumptions, and burdens ofproof. He notes a second wave of amendedlemon laws that strengthen the consumer's posi-tion. He details changes in lengthening the pe-riod of warranty protection, providing the con-sumer the choice of remedy, and reforming thedispute-settlement procedures. He highlights theMassachusetts lemon law as an influential andpro-consumer model for other states consider-ing amendments. Reitz also details the Massa-chusetts enforcement mechanism and the con-sumers' extensive remedies.

Reitz points out that constitutional chal-lenges to the first wave of lemon laws failed. Heconcludes that the amendments currently underconsideration in various states will increase bothlitigation and constitutional objections of themanufacturers. He then predicts the emergenceof new lemon laws to address the complaints ofused car purchasers.

7. Richard L. Coffinberger and Linda B.Samuels, Legislative Responses to the Plight ofNew Car Purchasers, 18-2 U.C.C. L.J. 168(1985), 9 pages.

Richard Coffinberger and Linda Samuelsreview several legislative initiatives at the stateand federal levels designed to address the prob-lem of automobile lemons. They define "lem-ons" as new automobiles that evidence seriousmechanical problems that are routinely difficultto eliminate at or near the date of purchase. Theauthors recount the advent of express warrantiesin the 1960s as a successful marketing tool forautomobile manufacturers but an often ineffec-tive promise for consumers.

They review the first major attempt byCongress to address the lemon issue in theMMWA and note its coverage, its shortcomings,

Feature Articles e 411995-1996

and its proposed amendments. They also reviewan unsuccessful attempt to pass a federal lemonlaw through the Automobile Consumer Protec-tion Act of 1983. This act was never passed andwas never reintroduced. The authors note thatstate legislatures also were beginning to respondto consumer demands. Connecticut and Califor-nia were the first states to pass lemon laws, serv-ing as models for many other states. Althougheach state's law may vary, lemon laws generallyretain several of the same core elements. Be-cause there are many substantive issues on whichthese state laws vary, the authors conclude thatthis type of regulation will continue to expandand eventually may be seen at the federal level.

II. Guides for Practitioners

1. Roger D. Billings, Jr., Handling Automo-bile Warranty and Repossession Cases,Deerfield, IL: Clark Boardman Callaghan, 1992,looseleaf.

This book is a comprehensive litigationguide to the law governing automobile transac-tions. It encompasses all aspects of automobilesales, beginning with contract formation andending with collection of deficiency judgments.This guidebook is useful for attorneys on eitherside of a lemon law claim. Among the manytopics covered are the MMWA, lemon laws, de-ceptive trade practices acts, and buyer and dealerrights under the UCC.

The book includes a chapter on handlinglemon law cases. It discusses lemon laws gen-erally, vehicles covered, arbitration requirements,standards of proof, manufacturer defenses, buyerremedies, lessor-lessee remedies, attorney's fees,dealer liability, aspects of litigation, disclosureof lemon status, and used car lemon laws. The

book includes numerous statutes and case cita-tions. It contains reprints of the MMWA andFederal Trade Commission Rule 703, which setsforth the criteria for FTC-approved informal dis-pute settlement mechanisms as required by manystates. Throughout the text, Billings explains thetreatment of non-traditional defective vehicles,such as leased cars and mobile homes. The bookcontains an updated supplementary section onrecent developments,

2. C. Victoria Woodward, Automobile War-ranty Law: State and Federal Lemon Rights,

Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company, 1993,636 pages.

Victoria Woodward aims to help practi-tioners navigate their way through the most com-plex defective automobile case. She provides acomprehensive discussion of relevant UCC pro-visions, the MMWA, and state lemon laws.Through the use of numerous case citations andinformative notes, Woodward apprises practitio-ners of the most important aspects of automo-bile warranty law.

The treatise contains a chapter on evalu-ating and preparing a lemon case. Written by anexpert on consumer warranty law, this chapterwalks practitioners through the litigation process,which begins with the anticipated, initial clientconsultation. Woodward also considers alterna-tive consumer remedies and the anticipated de-fenses of manufacturers and dealers. She alsocovers arbitration and informal dispute resolu-tion, attorney's fees, and the FTC rule preserv-ing consumers' claims and defenses in consumercredit transactions. The appendix is also a use-ful resource. It provides a reprint of the MMWA,a table of cases, and pertinent information forpractitioners (including a summary of each state'slemon law, cites to all state deceptive trade prac-

42 - Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

tices statutes, and contact information for stateagencies, consumer action organizations, andmanufacturers).

Il. Informal Dispute Resolution

1. Gregory L. Barnes, Note, Consumers Swal-low Another Lemon: Agency Consent OrderPreemption of State "Lemon Law" Standards forInformal Dispute Resolution (General Motors v.Abrams), 1990 J. Disp. Resol. 163 (1990), 14pages.

Gregory Barnes examines General Mo-tors v. Abrams,8 a federal case in which an auto-mobile manufacturer successfully challengedNew York's arbitration requirements. The plain-tiff manufacturer prevailed on its claim that theFTC preempted New York's enactment. Theauthor gives the history behind the case. He re-counts the facts that led to the agreement betweenGeneral Motors and the FTC and the dispute thatarose when New York's lemon law required themanufacturer to go beyond the conditions of thatagreement.

Barnes then explains the grounds for fed-eral preemption of state law under theConstitution's Supremacy Clause. He also ex-plains the Supreme Court's "clear intent" stan-dard, which sets forth the test for finding expressor implied preemption. He looks at the districtcourt's application of the test in General Motorsand reviews the decisions of other federal courtson the issue of preemption by federal regulatoryagencies. Criticizing the court's ruling, he con-tends that the court's ruling sets bad policy.Barnes foresees a trend in such rulings and, there-fore, calls for Congressional action to restoreviability to state alternative dispute resolutionprograms.

2. David P. Hiatt, Note, A Sour Lemon?: Fed-eral Preemption of Lemon Law Regulations ofInformal Dispute Settlement Mechanisms, 1989J. Disp. Resol. 211, 12 pages.

David Hiatt examines Motor VehicleManufacturers Ass'n v. Abrams,9 in which a fed-eral court held that federal legislation preemptedNew York's dispute resolution mechanism.

He explains the concerns of Congress thatled to the enactment of the MMWA and re-views the guidelines Congress set for settlingconsumers' disputes. He explains why New Yorkand other states enacted their own laws directedat new motor vehicle buyers while incorporat-ing the guidelines set forth by Congress for dis-pute resolution.

Hiatt discusses the principles of theConstitution's Supremacy Clause, which sets thestandard for federal preemption. He explainshow the plaintiffs used those principles to chal-lenge the New York lemon law. In ruling in theassociation's favor, the district court held thatCongress had occupied the field by regulatingdispute resolution mechanisms and that the NewYork statute conflicted with Congress' policy.10

Hiatt examines the court's decision and comparesit with the views held by other federal courts.He surmises the court's ruling would limit NewYork's ability (and, possibly, the ability of otherstates) to protect the interests of its consumers.

IV. Non-traditional Vehicles

1. Terence Centner, The New "Tractor LemonLaws": An Attempt to Squeeze ManufacturersDraws Sour Benefits, 14 J. Prod. Liab. 121(1992), 16 pages.

Terence Centner discusses the develop-ment of tractor lemon laws as adopted in Geor-

Feature Articles * 431995-1996

gia, Illinois, Minnesota, and Virginia. He ex-plains the provisions of the statutes with respectto their terms, scope of coverage, duty to repair,replace or refund, notice requirements, length ofcoverage, affirmative defenses, statutes of limi-tation, dealer liability, bad-faith claims, and con-sumer enforcement of claims. He includes a tablethat delineates the major distinctions between thefour lemon laws.

Centner questions whether tractor lemonlaws are necessary and whether such legislationgives consumers any protection beyond existinglaw. He proposes alternative provisions that hecontends more appropriately assist owners ofdefective farm vehicles. His suggestions includeextending the length of coverage and the statuteof limitations, eliminating affirmative defenses,awarding incidental and consequential damages,restricting resale of the vehicle, and refundingmanufacturers for taxes paid on returned ve-hicles. He warns that the obligations tractorlemon laws impose on manufacturers may ad-versely affect consumers in the form of higherprices and less comprehensive warranty cover-age.

V. Publications for Non-Lawyers(Materials to Suggest to Clients)

1. Andrew A. Faglio, Lemonaid!: ALayperson's Guide to the Automobile LemonLaws, Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications,1991, 160 pages.

This book was written for consumers byAndrew Faglio, a consumer who used his state'slemon law to remedy his new car problems. Itwas designed to familiarize consumers withlemon laws and to encourage perseverance insuch cases. Most helpful is a reprint of the New

York new and used vehicle lemon laws, followedby an explanation of each in plain English.

He stresses the importance of documen-tation and organization and outlines methods foreach. He illustrates how to climb the organiza-tional ladder; initiating a compromise with thedealership's management, the owner of thedealership, and customer service representativesat the manufacturer's zone or central office. Theconsumer may use this advice to avoid legal ac-tion, but also to chronicle the actions and state-ments of the dealership and the manufacturerregarding the vehicle. The book includes a listof agencies, organizations, and articles consum-ers should utilize. Faglio also explains the arbi-tration and judicial process, offering tips for suc-cess at the arbitration hearing and in finding theright lawyer for the legal path. The appendixincludes a table of state lemon law provisions.

2. Richard L. Kaye, Lemon Aid: ExercisingYour Rights Under the Consumer Lemon Law,Northbrook, IL: TeleTravel Network, Inc.,1991, 128 pages.

This book is an informative guide aboutlemon laws and how they work. The reader fol-lows the plight of John T. Consumer, a fictitiouscharacter, who experiences difficulty with hisnew car and ultimately brings the matter to asuccessful resolve. Through this case scenario,the author, Richard Kaye, illustrates to the readerthe consumer's rights and how to exercise them.

Kaye explains the meaning of a warrantyand the impact of lemon laws on automobilewarranties. He takes a step back to explain theinfluence of the MMWA as the catalyst for statelemon law legislation. He defines standard lemonlaw terms and explains the major provisions com-mon to lemon laws. He lays out the "how-to's"of confronting the dealer or manufacturer about

44 9 Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

a defective new car before resorting to legal ac-tion. Kaye also describes three avenues the con-sumer can take if further action is necessary: themanufacturer's informal dispute settlementmechanism, a state arbitration program, and civilcourt proceedings. The appendix includes a sum-mary of each state's lemon law provisions andcontact information for state agencies and auto-motive manufacturers.

3. Ralph Nader and Clarence Ditlow, TheLemon Book, Mount Kisco, NY: Moyer BellLimited, 1990, 368 pages.

This book has been updated and pub-lished every 10 years for the past three decades.Ralph Nader, a renowned consumer advocate,and Clarence Ditlow trace the progress madebetween the automobile industry and new carpurchasers in resolving defective car conflicts.They offer practical advice to disgruntled carbuyers. They strive to equip consumers with theinformation they need to settle disputes over adefective new car and push for reform of the lawsand remedies meant to protect consumers.

The discussion is facilitated by numer-ous news accounts and letters written by lemoncar owners demonstrating the problems purchas-ers faced, the solutions they employed, and thesettlements reached. They define relevant legalterms and review the laws applicable to car pur-chases. They explain state lemon laws with re-spect to their prerequisites, procedure, pitfalls,and benefits. Finally, they discuss preventivestrategies to avoid purchasing a lemon and avariety of avenues to take if the car purchasedappears defective.

VI. Improving Lemon Laws

1. Vicki D. Rau, Comment, New Remedies

for Defective Automobile Purchasers: A Pro-posalfor a Model Lemon Law, 23 Val. U. L. Rev.145, (1988), 32 pages.

Vicki Rau first focuses on the aspects ofthe MMWA and the UCC that make them inef-fective remedies for defective automobile pur-chasers. Rau then discusses the typical provi-sions of a lemon law and the advantages lemonlaws offer over the more traditional remedies.She illustrates that lemon laws themselves arenot perfect and, accordingly, proposes a modellemon law statute.

Rau finds current lemon laws have fourmain short-comings: a lack of uniform standardsamong the states to facilitate compliance bymanufacturers, the failure to apply to impliedwarranties, unclear guidelines for informal dis-pute resolution, and ill-defined terms within thestatutes, a shortcoming that leads to inconsistentinterpretations by litigants, arbiters, and courts.She believes her model lemon law addressesthese shortcomings, as it establishes objectivestandards to determine a reasonable number ofrepair attempts by the manufacturer, extendslemon law coverage to implied warranties, andencourages the use of non-judicial dispute reso-lution mechanisms, a less expensive, less time-consuming alternative to litigation.

2. Joan Vogel, Squeezing Consumers:Lemon Laws, Consumer Warranties, and a Pro-posal for Reform, 1985 Ariz. St. L.J. 589, 86pages.

Joan Vogel takes a critical look at statelemon laws. She asks whether these laws giveconsumers more protection than pre-existinglaws and whether they contain an effective meansof enforcement. She discusses the UCC provi-sions for express and implied warranties, war-ranty disclaimers, and limitations of remedy. She

Feature Articles 9 451995-1996

also discusses the MMWA and its impact on theuse of warranties. Vogel explains and examinesthe substantive provisions of state lemon laws,including the scope of coverage, disclosure,notice, and resale requirements, the duty to re-pair, replace, or refund, and enforcement provi-sions.

Vogel concludes that lemon laws are in-effective because they simply restate existing lawor are more restrictive than existing law. Shesuggests that Congress enact a lemon law to beenforced by a federal agency, such as the FTC.She contends that agency enforcement is idealbecause an agency can track patterns of abuseby manufacturers, develop expertise in the areaof warranty disputes, issue recalls where highnumbers of design and manufacturing defects arefound, and adjudicate disputes in an impartial andspeedy manner.

VII. State Lemon Laws

Arkansas1. Clifford Block, Arkansas' New Motor

Vehicle Quality Assurance Act-A Branch ofHope for Lemon Owners, 16 U. Ark. Little RockL.J. 493 (1994) 20 pages.

Clifford Block discusses the Arkansaslemon law. He points out that since the Arkan-sas and South Dakota legislatures enacted lemonlaws in 1993, every state had enacted some ver-sion of lemon law legislation. He reviews thelegal climate in Arkansas that necessitated theenactment of this lemon law. In the typical lemonvehicle claim, consumers have been insuffi-ciently protected by existing remedies under thestate's UCC, including revocation of acceptanceand breach of warranty. He also points out thatmost automobile warranties have been worded

to avoid the application of remedies under theMMWA.

Block outlines the coverage, application,and remedies of the Arkansas law. He uses ahypothetical to illustrate how to apply and usethe law. He points out that the existing case lawof other states' lemon laws also may be useful ininterpreting provisions of this law.

Connecticut1. Mary A. Beattie, Note, The Connecticut

Lemon Law, 5 U. Bridgeport L. Rev. 175 (1983),28 pages.

Mary Beattie introduces the Connecticutlemon law. She begins with the background ofthe law. She reviews the provisions of the UCCand the MMWA that consumers have used un-successfully. Demonstrating the inadequacies ofthe pre-existing remedies, she discusses leadingcases involving defective automobiles that werelitigated under the UCC.

Beattie discusses the goals and purposesof the Connecticut lemon law, indicating how thestatute improves upon the relief provided by theUCC. She also reviews the 1983 amendmentsto the lemon law. She closes with the criticismsvoiced by manufacturers, who felt the law wasunnecessary, as well as soft on auto dealers, andby other critics who felt the law not strongenough.

Florida1. Duane A. Daiker, Note, Florida's Motor

Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act: Lemon-Aidfor the Consumer, 45 Fla. L. Rev. 253 (1993), 22pages.

Duane Daiker chronicles the develop-ment of lemon law legislation in Florida, citingthe most significant changes in Florida's law

46 e Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

from the state's original statute to the currentversion. He explains the procedure and substanceof the statute and reviews a string of cases inter-preting those provisions. He sets forth alterna-tive remedies available to purchasers of defec-tive automobiles under the UCC and the MMWA.He notes the advantages and disadvantages ofeach of these remedies.

To analyze the law's overall effectivenessand its potential faults, Daiker compares theFlorida law to lemon laws of other states withrespect to common provisions and emergingtrends. Daiker suggests the statute be revised toclarify ambiguous provisions, strengthen en-forcement mechanisms, and give consumersadded protection in the scope and duration ofcoverage. While the law addresses needed pro-tections for consumers, the author argues thatthese revisions would make the law more con-gruent with the legislative intent.

Illinois1. W. Eugene Basanta, The Illinois New Car

Buyer Protection Act-An Analysis and Evalua-tion of the Illinois Lemon Law, 1984 S. Ill. U.L.J. 1, 70 pages.

Eugene Basanta undertakes an in-depthexamination of the Illinois lemon law. As back-ground, he discusses the protections car buyersreceive under the UCC and the MMWA. Heexplains the provisions of the UCC that were uti-lized by car buyers and how the MMWA wasenacted with the intention of augmenting thoseprovisions to better benefit consumers.

Basanta discusses the major provisionsof the lemon law regarding the scope of cover-age, operational definitions, remedies, alterna-tive dispute resolution, election of remedies, limi-tations period, and disclosure requirements. He

compares these provisions with those of otherstates and points out possible problem areas.Basanta suggests the law contains critical omis-sions such as provisions awarding collectioncosts and attorney's fees, incorporating the lawinto the state's fraudulent practices act, prohibit-ing contractual waivers of consumers rights un-der the law, and mandating disclosure of thevehicle's history at resale. Despite the commend-able action taken by the legislature to rectify in-adequacies in existing laws, Basanta warns that,without revisions, the lemon law may only frus-trate consumers further.

2. Lisa K. Jorgenson, Comment, IllinoisLemon Car Buyer's Options in a Breach of War-ranty Action, 20 J. Marshall L. Rev. 483 (1987),25 pages.

Lisa Jorgenson examines the alternativesavailable to defective car buyers in Illinois un-der the UCC, the MMWA, and the Illinois lemonlaw. She explains the UCC provisions for war-ranties, disclaimers, and limitations of remedy.She also explains the purpose and provisions ofthe MMWA and the Illinois lemon law as wellas the remedies for breach of warranty providedby each. Jorgenson compares these remedieswith respect to the vehicles and warranties theycover, standards of proof used at trial, privityrequirements, arbitration provisions, awards ofattorney's fees, litigation costs, and statutes oflimitation.

She notes each of these remedies andsuggests that consumers should use them con-junctively to maximize the chances for recov-ery. Jorgenson proposes changes for all the rem-edies discussed. Her proposed lemon law hasfour elements: mandating FTC-approved infor-mal dispute resolution, lengthening the durationof coverage to the full extent of the

Feature Articles 9 471995-1996

manufacturer's warranty, extending the scope ofcoverage to include motorcycles and pickuptrucks, and preserving buyers' claims under theUCC despite settlement under the lemon law.

Indiana1. Harold Greenberg, The Indiana Motor Ve-

hicle Protection Act of 1988: The Real Thingfor Sweetening the Lemon or Merely a Weak Ar-tificial Sweetener?, 22 Ind. L. Rev. 57 (1989),44 pages.

Harold Greenberg examines the Indianalemon law. He covers many bases, focusing es-pecially on the differences between lemon lawsand remedies already available. In addition, henotes that Indiana's law improves upon thoseremedies and that the Indiana legislature success-fully avoided the criticisms other states enduredin enacting their lemon laws.

Greenberg summarizes the relevant pro-visions of the UCC and MMWA. He contraststhese remedies with the Indiana lemon law topoint out the law's remedial purposes and iden-tify its strengths, weaknesses, and ambiguities.Greenberg explains the major provisions of thestate law and annotates case citations of otherjurisdictions interpreting similar provisions. Healso cites to numerous law review articles, newsaccounts, legislative hearings, and governmen-tal reports. Greenberg concludes that the lemonlaw is a step in the right direction, but has prob-lems. To remedy these problems, he outlines thir-teen steps the legislature should take to strengthenthe law. His proposed revisions focus on boththe procedural and substantive provisions of thestatute from the scope of coverage to the arbitra-tion process.

Michigan

1. Carol J. Mackela, Comment, An Examina-tion of the Michigan Lemon Law, 4 Cooley L.Rev. 677 (1987), 15 pages.

Carol Mackela introduces the Michiganlemon law. She compares the Michigan law toother state lemon laws and to pre-existing rem-edies in the state. She explains how the UCC'sunclear terms and rigid provisions often make itan unavailable remedy for lemon owners. Sheexplains that, despite the favorable features ofthe MMWA, the Act does not apply to most newcar sales. Mackela also notes that the MichiganConsumer Protection Act, which covers decep-tive trade practices, has not been widely utilizedby lemon owners.

She then discusses the purpose of theMichigan lemon law and significant revisionsmade to the original legislative bill. She reviewsprovisions of the law with respect to definitions,scope, duration of coverage, allowable repair at-tempts, refund and replacement of the vehicle,informal dispute resolution, attorney's fees, anddisclosure. Mackela suggests the law be modi-fied to cover the full length of the manufacturer'swarranty, reduce the allowable number of repairattempts, give consumers the option of refundor replacement, and extend coverage to used ve-hicles.

Minnesota1. Julie A.Vergeront, Note, A Sour Note: A

Look at the Minnesota Lemon Law, 68 Minn. L.Rev. 846 (1984), 34 pages.

Julie Vergeront discusses the Minnesotalemon law. She begins with an overview of rem-edies available to automobile purchasers underthe UCC, the MMWA, and Minnesota's con-sumer protection act. She explains the majorprovisions of the lemon law, including manufac-

48 o Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

turers' obligations, consumers' rights and rem-

edies, and dispute settlement procedures. Ana-lyzing the effectiveness of the statute, she com-pares the lemon law to the pre-existing remediesand illustrates ways in which the statute is simi-lar to, weaker than, and more beneficial than pre-existing remedies.

She proposes amendments that wouldmake the statute at least as effective as the pre-

existing remedies. Her proposals include ex-tending the lengths of warranty coverage and thestatute of limitations, assigning a deadline tomanufacturers for completing repairs, giving

consumers a more flexible standard for provinga reasonable number of repair attempts, substan-tially revising the arbitration provision, and clari-fying the enforcement provision with amend-ments allowing consequential and punitive dam-ages. Vergeront concludes that, without amend-ments, consumers are in no better position to dealwith defective automobiles.

Nebraska1. Susan M.Conroy, Comment, L.B. 155:

Nebraska's "Lemon Law": Synthesizing Rem-

edies for the Owner of a "Lemon ", 17 CreightonL. Rev. 345 (1984), 31 pages.

Susan Conroy introduces the Nebraska

lemon law. As a backdrop to the legislation, sheshares the experiences of disgruntled car buy-

ers, all of whom seemed to influence the enact-ment of the lemon law. She explains the provi-sions of the lemon law and notes the oppositionlegislators faced in passing these provisions. Shefurther contends that opponents to the lemon law

asserted that the traditional remedies alreadyavailable to consumers were sufficient. In lightof this argument, she points out the shortcom-ings of the UCC, the MMWA, Nebraska's con-

sumer protection statutes, and existing manufac-turer arbitration boards.

Conroy explains how the lemon law dif-fers from the traditional remedies with respectto its guidelines for arbitration and its definitionsof substantial impairment and reasonable repairattempts. In her evaluation of the statute, Conroyconcludes that the lemon law meets the goals ofthe legislature, as the law, unlike the traditionalremedies, provides relief specific to purchasersof defective cars.

New Jersey1. Philip J. Espinosa, Note, New Jersey's

"Lemon Law," A Statute Ripe for Revision: Re-

cent Developments and a Proposal for Reform,19 Rutgers L.J. 97 (1987), 32 pages.

Phillip Espinosa takes an in-depth look

at the New Jersey Automobile Warranty Act. Hereviews the recovery methods available to ag-grieved car buyers before the Act's passage, in-cluding breach of warranty, revocation of accep-

tance, the rule of perfect tender, and strict liabil-ity in tort. He compares the provisions of theAct to these pre-lemon law recovery methods,and he includes a reprint of the Act.

Espinosa discusses proposed amend-

ments before the legislature and offers his ownrecommendations for revision. He argues for the

following revisions: eliminating the arbitrationand notice requirements, extending the period ofwarranty coverage, giving buyers the option ofrefund or replacement, affording buyers an al-lowance for transportation during repairs, allow-

ing lemon claims in small claims court, award-ing successful plaintiffs two times the value of

the lemon and attorney's fees, and requiring dis-closure of the history of the vehicle at resale.

Combining the proposed legislative amendments

Feature Articles e 491995-1996

and his own recommendations, Espinosa illus-trates a model statute for states to adopt.

2. Harvey M. Sklaw, The New Jersey LemonLaw: A Bad Idea Whose Time Has Come, 9 SetonHall Legis. J. 137 (1985), 23 pages.

Harvey Sklaw discusses the New Jerseylemon law. He begins with the history behindstate lemon laws. He explains the provisions ofthe Connecticut lemon law, the influential pre-decessor to New Jersey's lemon law. He alsoexplains the provisions of the New Jersey statue,displaying reprints of both the New Jersey andConnecticut laws.

Sklaw reviews New Jersey case law re-lating to defective automobiles before the lemonlaw. He draws on these decisions to examinewhether consumers fare better under the pre-ex-isting remedies than under the lemon law stat-ute. He also briefly compares the provisions ofthe New Jersey lemon law to the Connecticutlemon law and the UCC. Sklaw discusses thestatute's arbitration requirement and why he be-lieves the requisite is unworkable. He criticizesthe lemon law for taking away the consumer'sright to perfect tender, giving manufacturers thechoice of refund or replacement of the vehicle,giving manufacturers an allowance for use of thevehicle, and causing consumers to absorb theincidental and consequential costs of owning afaulty automobile. Sklaw sums up the statute asa bad idea despite the best intentions of its spon-sors.

New Mexico1. Joseph Goldberg, New Mexico's "Lemon

Law: " Consumer Protection or Consumer Frus-tration?, 16N.M. L. Rev. 251 (1986), 31 pages.

Joseph Goldberg analyzes New Mexico'sMotor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act. Before

determining whether the Act improves upon pre-vious means of recovery available to disap-pointed automobile purchasers, he explains ap-plicable provisions of the UCC and the MMWA.He discusses the obligations the UCC imposeson automobile dealers and the rights createdwhen those obligations are not satisfied.Goldberg also explains the obligations of themanufacturer under the MMWA and how the Actincorporates provisions of the UCC.

He outlines the overall framework of theNew Mexico lemon law regarding its scope, ob-ligations imposed on manufacturers and dealers,and the remedies it creates. To evaluate thestrengths and weaknesses of the lemon law, hecompares the law to pre-existing remedies.Goldberg concludes that the Act will do little forconsumer protection. The Act, argues Goldberg,is soft on manufacturers but concomitantly im-poses a hardship on consumers with its harsh stat-ute of limitations, restrictive election of remediesprovisions, and failure to compensate consum-ers for out-of-pocket expenses resulting from theautomobile's defect.

New York1. Martha M. Post, Comment, New York's

Used-Car Lemon Law: An Evaluation, 35 Buff.L. Rev. 971 (1986), 49 pages.

Martha Post presents the New Yorklemon law for used cars. She first reviews theremedies available to used car buyers before thelemon law was enacted: the UCC, the MMWA,and the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law sec-tion 417. She explains how buyers were frus-trated in attempting to enforce these remedies.

Post traces the origins of the lemon lawto earlier statutes enacted to assist consumerswith defective automobiles, namely the FTC

50 9 Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

Used Motor Vehicle Regulation Rule, the Con-necticut lemon law, and the New York lemon lawfor new cars. She points out the advantages thelemon law poses over previous remedies. Postoutlines the provisions of the used car lemon lawwith respect to terminology, parties' rights, andduties at sale and after discovery of a defect andenforcement of the buyer's rights. She contem-plates the effects of the statute and the criticismsleveled against it. She reviews case law demon-strating judicial application of the law. Post sur-mises that the law will benefit consumers withincreased awareness of its existence.

2. Matthew Tracy, Survey of New YorkPractice - (General Business Law, GBL § 198-

a(k): Lemon Law's Alternative ArbitrationMechanism Requiring an Automobile Manufac-turer to Submit to Binding Arbitration atConsumer's Request Is Constitutional), 64 St.John's L. Rev. 379, 405 (1990) 7 pages.

Matthew Tracy discusses the constitu-tionality of the alternative arbitration mechanismof New York's lemon law. He notes that thelemon law was amended to include this bindingarbitration mechanism in response to the diffi-culties and delays encountered under the origi-nal law. He reviews the recent New York Courtof Appeals decision in Motor Vehicle Ass'n v.State," where the court ruled that this mecha-nism was constitutional and did not violate dueprocess. He also reviews the dissenting opinionand comments on the strength of the majorityopinion.

3. Samuel J. M. Donnelly and Mary AnnDonnelly, Commercial Law (pt. 7), 39 SyracuseL. Rev. 159, 208 (1987) 9 pages.

Samuel and Mary Ann Donnelly reviewrecent developments related to the New Yorklemon law. They note recent case law interpret-

ing the application of the New York law to bothnew and used cars. They discuss the relation be-tween the New York law and other state and fed-eral statutes. They also review a recent amend-ment to the New York law that prohibits thewaiver of consumer rights.

North Carolina1. Heather Newton, Note, When Life Gives

You Lemons, Make a Lemon Law: North Caro-lina Adopts Automobile Warranty Legislation, 66N.C. L. Rev. 1080 (1988), 15 pages.

Heather Newton introduces the NorthCarolina lemon law. As a latecomer to lemonlaw enactment, she claims the state was able tolearn from other states and consequently avoidthe mistakes in lemon laws of other states. Sheasserts that the legislature succeeded in avoid-ing the criticisms other states endured and that,relatively, North Carolina's version should be oneof the most effective in the country.

She explains the terms of a typical lemonlaw statute with respect to notice requirements,defects covered, refund or replacement provi-sions, damages recoverable, arbitration, andstatutory limits. Newton explains why pre-lemonlaw remedies were inadequate for new car buy-ers. She describes the protections available todefective car buyers under the MMWA and FTCregulations. Using case law, she illustrates thatdespite the substantial protections the UCC givesin its provisions for rejection, breach of warranty,and revocation of acceptance, the UCC also hasshortcomings. She then analyzes each provisionof the North Carolina lemon law, using otherstates as a measure to set forth the law's strengthsand weaknesses.

Feature Articles * 511995-1996

Ohio1. Julian B. Bell, 111, Comment, Ohio's Lemon

Law: Ohio Joins the Rest of the Nation in Wag-ing War Against the Automobile Limited War-ranty, 57 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1015 (1989), 19 pages.

Although he primarily discusses Ohio'slemon law, Julian Bell provides an extensive dis-cussion of the traditional remedies available tothe purchasers of defective automobiles. Point-ing out the shortcomings of these remedies, hedemonstrates the legislative motives to enactlemon laws. Bell explains that although theMMWA intended to give greater protection toconsumers purchasing new cars, it had the detri-mental effect of leading dealers to insert stan-dardized limited warranties in new car contracts.Bell also explores UCC remedies for defectivegoods (rejection, revocation of acceptance, andbreach of warranty) and shows how these rem-edies became unreliable as a result of carefulmaneuvering by automobile manufacturers.

He explains the effect, purpose, scope,and operation of the state's lemon law. Bell alsopoints out differences between the state's law andUCC provisions. In addition, he highlights someof the pro-consumer aspects of the statute, and,using comparable legislation in other states as ameasure, he proposes revisions.

2. D. Lewis Clark, Jr., Note, Alternative Dis-pute Resolution under Ohio's Lemon Laws: ACritical Analysis, 6 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol.333 (1991), 12 pages.

Lewis Clark asks whether the Ohio lemonlaw's provision for informal dispute resolutiongives a consumer more expedient relief or merelyslows the consumer's pursuit of civil litigation.He gives the background to the Ohio lemon lawand explains its terms. He also discusses thespecific obligations of manufacturers under the

dispute resolution provision.In his analysis of the provision, Clark

points out that little is required of manufacturersin establishing dispute resolution programs andthat there is no incentive for manufacturers toupgrade those mechanisms. He recommendsmandatory certification of manufacturers' dis-pute resolution mechanisms or, in the alterna-tive, state-run arbitration programs. He discussesthe experiences of other states that have adoptedone or both approaches. Clark points out theconstitutional considerations surrounding lemonlaw arbitration provisions and discusses two fed-eral cases that raised these issues.

Oklahoma1. Jeanne Rehberg, Comment, Buyer's Rem-

edies for a Defective Automobile: The UC. C.Versus the Oklahoma Lemon Law, 21 Tulsa L.J.318 (1985), 34 pages.

Jeanne Rehberg evaluates the Oklahomalemon law as compared to pre-existing remediesavailable to purchasers of defective cars underOklahoma law. She discusses the remedies thatbuyers previously utilized under the UCC, suchas revocation of acceptance, rejection, and breachof warranty. She also explains the provisions ofthe MMWA and how the Act was used to obtaina refund or replacement of the automobile.

Rehberg describes the lemon law regard-ing the entities it includes and excludes, the rightsit creates, the manufacturers' affirmative de-fenses, pre-litigation procedures, and the rem-edies it preserves. To better benefit consumers,she suggests the law be amended to reflect theConnecticut lemon law. Specifically, she rec-ommends amendments that would extend thelength of coverage, give buyers the choice ofrefund or replacement, ensure that replaced ve-

52 e Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number I

hicles are comparable to the original, define "sub-stantial impairment" in more objective terms,reduce the requisite days out-of-service fromforty-five to thirty, and require objective, certi-fied informal dispute settlement programs. Theappendix includes a reprint of the Oklahomalemon law and contains a listing of citations toother state lemon laws.

Texas1. Ayala Alexopoulos, Comment, A New Twist

for Texas "Lemon" Owners, 17 St. Mary's L.J.155 (1985), 28 pages.

Ayala Alexopoulos introduces the Texaslemon law. She reviews Texas case law to illus-trate the problems consumers faced utilizing theUCC and the state's deceptive trade practices act.She summarizes the provisions of the lemon law,pointing out its unique provision that requiresconsumers to submit their cases first to the TexasMotor Vehicle Commission, a state agency, asopposed to a manufacturer-sponsored arbitrationprogram. The lemon law is also unique in thatdecisions of the commission are admissible inevidence if the manufacturer appeals the deci-sion, but are not likewise admissible if the con-sumer requests the appeal.

Alexopoulos reviews the constitutionalattack of the lemon law that arose from theseunique provisions. In Chrysler Corp. v. TexasMotor Vehicle Ass'n,'2 the Fifth Circuit upheldthe statute, declaring that submission to hearingby the commission did not deny themanufacturer's due process or equal protection. 3

The author analyzes the provision and asks howit can be justified. She finds that the route cho-sen by the Texas legislature for settlement ofwarranty disputes is justified, because it placesconsumers on a more level playing field with

manufacturers.2. Darby Riley, Squeezing the Lemon-

Helping Texas Consumers With New Car Prob-lems (Symposium: Consumer Protection and theTexas Deceptive Trade Practices Act), 20 St.Mary's L.J. 617 (1989) 18 pages.

Darby Riley summarizes several rem-edies that the Texas lemon law offers. She de-tails the requirements of the statute: includingthe consumer must timely notify; the manufac-turer/distributor must be unable to correct thedefect; and the defect substantially impairs thevalue of the car. Riley also notes the drawbacksof the Texas lemon law: limiting the maximumrelief available; preventing recovery of attorney'sfees; assessing finance charges or incidental andconsequential damages; requiring retention of thevehicle and assessing continued finance pay-ments while adjudicating; tolerating a seriouscase backlog; and litigating against the seasonedattorneys of manufacturers. However, this lawmay be useful in obtaining an expedient resolu-tion by using it concurrently with other remedies,including the Texas Deceptive Trade PracticesAct ("DTPA").

Riley notes that DTPA may be used withvarious provisions of the Texas Business andCommerce Code to revoke the consumer's ac-ceptance, recover the purchase price andattorney's fees, and rescind the sales contract.By combining the available remedies, consum-ers may find sufficient recourse and give manu-facturers the incentive to make proper and timelyrepairs.

Utah1. Lloyd A. Hardcastle, Recent Developments,

Recent Developments in Utah Law (New MotorVehicle Warranties), 1986 Utah L. Rev. 162-71,

Feature Articles e 531995-1996

9 pages.Lloyd Hardcastle presents Utah's New

Motor Vehicle Warranties Act. He explains theprovisions of the Act with respect to its purpose,who it protects, and what it requires of the par-ties it reaches. He explains the problems thatarose for defective car buyers under the UCCprior to the lemon law and how the legislatureattempted to remedy these problems by enact-ing the statute. Hardcastle also shares manufac-turers' reactions to the lemon law and the prob-able impact the statute could have on their in-dustry. He compares the provisions of the Utahlemon law to those of other states, noting sig-nificant variations in the state laws and pointingout the possible shortcomings of the Utah stat-ute. Hardcastle explains the statute's most dis-tinctive feature: providing for administrativeenforcement of the lemon law as opposed to re-quiring consumers to use their own private at-torneys.

Virginia1. Carol S. Nance, Comment, Virginia's

Lemon Law: The Best Treatment for CarOwner's Canker?, 19 U. Rich. L. Rev. 405

(1985), 24 pages.Carol Nance introduces Virginia's Mo-

tor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act. She de-scribes the Virginia Supreme Court's decision inGasque v. Mooers Motor Car Co., 14 the case thatprompted the Virginia legislature to enact thestate's lemon law. With only the provisions ofthe UCC as an applicable remedy, the plaintiffswere unsuccessful in obtaining a refund or re-placement of the defective vehicle. Nance ex-plains the provisions of the UCC and the MMWAand demonstrates the drawbacks that surfaced incases where faulty automobiles were at issue.

She explains the FTC arbitration regula-tions under the MMWA and points out the fail-ings of non-FTC approved arbitration mecha-nisms within the state. She examines the BetterBusiness Bureau's pre-existing automobile arbi-tration program as an indication of future infor-mal dispute settlements under the lemon law.Nance then reviews the lemon law itself, point-ing out its flaws and making several recommen-dations to strengthen the law. Her most emphaticsuggestion calls for a definition of what defectswill constitute a "significant impairment" underthe lemon law. She predicts this issue may be amajor stumbling block for litigants.

E N D N 0 T E S'CONN. GEN. STAT. ANN. §§ 42-179 to

-186 (West 1993 & Supp. 1995).2ALA. CODE §§ 8-20A-1 to -6 (1993);

ALASKA STAT. §§ 45.45.300-.360(1994); ARIZ. REV. STAT. ANN. §§44-1261 to -1265 (1994); ARK. CODEANN. §§ 4-90-401 to -417 (MichieSupp. 1993); CAL. CIV. CODE §1793.2 (West 1985 & Supp. 1995);COLO. REV. STAT. §§ 42-10-101 to -107 (Supp. 1994); CONN. GEN.STAT. §§ 42-179 to -186 (West 1993& Supp. 1995); DEL. CODE ANN. tit.6, §§ 5001-5009 (1993 & Supp. 1994);D.C. CODE ANN. §§ 40-1301 to -

54 * Loyola Consumer Law Reporter

1309 (1981 & Supp. 1995); FLA.STAT. ANN. §§ 681.10-.117 (WestSupp. 1995); GA. CODE ANN. §§ 10-1-780 to -794 (Harrison 1990); HAW.CODE ANN. §§ 4811-1 to -4 (Supp.1992); IDAHO CODE §§ 48-901 to -909 (Supp. 1994); ILL. COMP. STAT.ch. 815 § 380/1-8 (West 1994); IND.CODE ANN. §§ 24-5-13-1 to -24(Bums 1991 & Supp. 1994); IOWACODE ANN. §§ 322G.1-.15 (WestSupp. 1995); KAN. STAT. ANN. §§50-645 to -646 (1994); KY. REV.STAT. ANN. §§ 367-840 to -846(Baldwin 1994); LA. REV. STAT.

ANN. §§ 51:1941-:1948 (West 1987& Supp. 1995); ME. REV. STAT. ANN.tit. 10, §§ 1161-1169 (West Supp.1995); MD. CODE ANN. COM. L. II§§ 14-1501 to -1504 (1991 & Supp.1994); MASS. GEN. LAWS ANN. ch.90, § 7N 1/2 (West 1989 & Supp.1995); MICH. COMP. LAWS ANN. §§257.1401-.1410 (West 1990 & Supp.1995); MINN. STAT. ANN. § 325F.665(West 1995); MISS. CODE ANN. §§63-17-151 to -165 (1989 & Supp.1994); MO. REV. STAT. §§ 407.560-.579 (1986 & Supp. 1993); MONT.CODE ANN. §§ 61-4-501 to -533

Volume 8, number I

(1993); NEB. REV. STAT. §§ 60-2701to -2709 (1993); NEV. REV. STAT.ANN. § 597.630 (Supp. 1994); N.H.REV. STAT. ANN. 357-D:1 (1995);N.J. STAT. ANN. §§ 56:12-29 to -49(West Supp. 1995); N.M. STAT. ANN.§§ 57-16A-1 to -9 (Michie 1987 &Supp. 1994); N.Y. GEN. BUS. L. §§198-a to 199 (McKinney 1988 & Supp.1995); N.C. GEN. STAT. §§ 20-351.1to .10 (1994 & Supp. 1994); N.D.CENT. CODE §§ 51-07-16 to -22(1989 & Supp. 1993); OHIO REV.CODE ANN. §§ 1345.71-.77 (Ander-son 1993); OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 15,§ 01 (West 1993); OR. REV. STAT. §§646.315-.375 (1993 & Supp. 1994);PA. STAT. ANN. tit. 73, §§ 1951-1963(1993); R.I. GEN. LAWS §§ 31-5.2-1to -13 (1994 Republished); S.C. CODEANN. §§ 56-28-10 to -110 (Law. Co-op. 1991 & Supp. 1994); S.D. CODI-FIED LAWS ANN. §§ 32-6D-1 to -11(Supp. 1995); TENN. CODE ANN. §§55-24-201 to -212 (1993 & Supp.1994); TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN.art 4413(36) § 6.07 (West Supp. 1995);UTAH CODE ANN. §§ 13-20-1 to -7(1992 & Supp. 1994); VT. STAT. ANN.tit. 9, §§ 4170-4181 (1993); VA. CODEANN. §§ 59.1-207.9 to.16:1 (Michie

1992 & Supp. 1994); WASH. REV.CODE ANN. §§ 19.118.005-904(West 1989 & Supp. 1995); W. VA.CODE §§ 46A-6A-1 to -9 (1995);WIS. STAT. ANN. § 218.015 (West1994, Supp. 1994 & Interim Supp. June1995); WYO. STAT. § 40-17-101(1993).

' Roger R. Billings, Jr., HANDLINrG Auro-MOBILE WARRANTY AND REPOSSESSION

CASES § 4.1 (1992).4 See generally, Joan Vogel, Squeezing

Consumers: Lemon Laws, ConsumerWarranties, and a Proposalfor Reform,1985 Ariz. St. L.J. 589 (1989)(describ-ing the increased protection that lemonlaws provide for consumers).

For purposes of this bibliography, "lemonlaw" refers to typical state-enacted "re-pair or replace" statutes. Other publi-cations may use the phrase in broaderterms.

6 Over the years, most states have modi-fied their lemon laws in some way.Many of the sources cited in this bibli-ography were written before thesechanges took effect and, therefore, maynot reflect those changes. Readers ofthis publication should check all appli-

cable statutes for changes before com-pleting their research.

7Throughout the text, the terms "informaldispute resolution," "informal disputesettlement mechanisms," and "arbitra-tion" are used interchangeably.

General Motors v. Abrams, 703 F Supp.1103 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n v.Abrams, 697 F. Supp. 726 (S.D.N.Y.1988).

'Old. at 729.

Motor Vehicle Ass'n v. State, 550 N.E.2d919 (N.Y. 1990).

12 Chrysler Corp. v. Texas Motor VehicleAss'n, 755 F.2d 1192 (5th Cir. 1985).

I3 ld. at 1202. Rejecting the automobilemanufacturer's claim that the Texaslemon law violated the Equal Protec-tion Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-ment, the court announced that thelemon law was rationally related to thestate's legitimate interest in providingconsumers with a remedy for defectiveautomobiles. Id.

'4 Gasque v. Mooers Motor Car Co., 227S.E.2d 384 (Va. 1984).

Feature Articles * 551995-1996

Subscribe to the Reporter.The Loyola Consumer Law Reporter is theonly publication of its kind.Four times each year, the Reporter brings you clearly written scholarlyarticles about consumer law, along with news about events, laws, andcourt decisions you can use in your studies, practice, or daily life. Tosubscribe, just clip the form below and mail it in with your check.

Type of organization:

o Law libraryName

o Law firm

Address o Non-profit

o Individual

o Other (specify):

City, State and ZIP Code

Send this form with your check for $15 to

Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Let us know what top-Loyola University Chicago School of Law ics would you like to seeOne East Pearson Street included in the Reporter.Chicago, Illinois 60611-2055

L-------------------------------------IJ

For a limited list of materials used in preparing the Consumer News and Recent Cases sections,send your request to the appropriate editor at the Loyola Consumer Law Reporter, Loyola Univer-sity Chicago School of Law, One East Pearson Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2055. Indicate spe-cifically the volume and issue numbers and the story title, and include five dollars for handling andpostage.

56 e Loyola Consumer Law Reporter Volume 8, number 1