Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

LEWIS v. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA

United States District Court, S.D. New York


July 14, 2005.

REGINA LEWIS, Plaintiff,
v.
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., CORP., et al., Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: LEWIS KAPLAN, District Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff, an extremely dissatisfied auto purchaser, brings this action pro se against Nissan North America, Newburgh Nissan Car Dealership, Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp., and various employees of Nissan. She asserts claims under the Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ("MMWA"), 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq., and the Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTCA"), 15 U.S.C. § 45, as well as on various state law theories. Defendants have moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

In a thorough 48-page report and recommendation dated June 28, 2005, Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz recommended that the motion be granted on two independently sufficient grounds.

  First, he found that defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the merits, concluding that the TILA claim is untimely, that the MMWA fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted because there is no claim that any defendant failed to comply with the terms of plaintiff's service contract, that the FTCA claim is deficient because there is no private cause of action under that statute, and that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, she has not raised a genuine issue of material fact sufficient to warrant a trial on any of the state law claims.

  Second, Magistrate Judge Katz recommended dismissal on the ground that the plaintiff repeatedly violated court orders by, among other things, threatening and abusing defense counsel, court personnel and the Court itself.

  Plaintiff has responded with two letters, which the Court treats as objections to the report and recommendation. Having carefully review plaintiff's arguments, however, the Court is persuaded that plaintiff has voiced no legally sufficient objection to the report and recommendation and that defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

  Accordingly, the objections are overruled, and defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted on both grounds relied upon by Magistrate Judge Katz. The Clerk shall close the case.

  SO ORDERED.

20050714

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.