Coupled Products v Navistar

Our client, Coupled Products, brought a breach of contract claim against automotive manufacturer Navistar.  Navistar counter sued seeking hundreds of thousands in damages.  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 $923,490.03 in 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 for $2,221,973.85 plus continuing costs and interest. The case settled before the appeal.

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. Young & Associates 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.

Detroit Center Tool, Inc. v Classic Design, Inc.

This case involved a dispute over engineering and design work that Classic Design was hired to perform for Detroit Center Tool on robotic assembly lines in numerous automotive plants in North America. The firm represented Plaintiff Detroit Center Tool. The Oakland County jury awarded the firm’s client, Detroit Center Tool, a verdict of $9 million, one of the largest awards ever in Oakland County Circuit Court.

K&S Services, Inc. v General Motors

K&S Services obtained $3 million in a settlement with General Motors before trial. K&S sued GM over unpaid invoices in connection with repair work performed by K&S for GM. GM countersued for over $10 million in alleged overcharges by K&S. After extensive discovery, and shortly before trial, a former judge serving as case evaluator suggested an award to K&S of approximately $3 million. Both parties accepted, and the case was settled on that basis.