Opinion ID: 2623432
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Class Action versus Administrative Remedy.

Text: ¶ 22 DaimlerChrysler argues that a class action is not superior because the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act impliedly preempts this warranty and common law tort action. Thus, it urges, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) must adjudicate this controversy. The Act, however, expressly provides that compliance with its provisions does not immunize a manufacturer from liability under common law or for warranty claims. 49 U.S.C. § 30103. ¶ 23 DaimlerChrysler also argues that, without regard to implied administrative preemption, the administrative remedy of a NHTSA complaint is superior to a class action. The argument must fail. ¶ 24 A class action may be maintained only when it is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2023(B)(3) (2001) (emphasis added). There is no administrative method of adjudication available to Plaintiffs. The NHTSA has declined to investigate further. See supra n. 1. An alternate method for adjudication must be available in order for it to be superior. ¶ 25 The question then becomes whether class action is superior to individual litigation. As the trial court found, the individual claims are not substantial enough to support individual litigation. In addition, the prosecution of separate individual actions would inevitably result in inconsistent results.