Kathy Wisniewski spent almost the entirety of her 35 year career defending corporations in class action cases throughout the United States, both in trial courts and on appeal. Now semi-retired, Ms. Wisniewski works part-time writing complex motion papers and appellate briefs.
Experience
- Successfully defended hundreds of cases alleging consumer fraud, unfair practices, breach of contract, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment through denial of class certification or outright defense judgment.
- Wrote briefs for, and argued, multiple cases on appeal in both state and federal courts nationwide.
SAMPLING OF APPELLATE WIN(Since 2020)
- Flynn v. FCA US LLC, 39 F.4th 946 (7th Cir. 2022) – Trial and appellate counsel in case certified as multi-state class action based on allegations that defects in vehicles’ infotainment systems made the vehicles susceptible to hacking and loss of control. At the summary judgment stage the trial court dismissed all claims for lack of Article III standing based on failure to prove injury. On appeal the dismissal was affirmed after the court found the defendants had a right to renew, as a factual matter after the close of discovery, a rejected challenge to standing raised at the pleading stage.
- Norman v. FCA US LLC, 2023 WL 6388926 (E.D.Mich. 2023). Counsel for defendant automobile manufacturer in putative multi-state vehicle-defect class action. Order granting motion to dismiss with prejudice.
- Faltermeier v. FCA US LLC, 899 F.3d 617 (8th Cir. 2018) – Trial and appellate counsel in class action alleging violations of state consumer protection law based on allegations of vehicle defects caused increased fire risk in rear end crashes. Summary judgment for defendant granted, and affirmed on appeal based on a lack of evidence showing
- Hadley v. Chrysler Group, 2015 WL 988962 (6th Cir. 2015) – Trial and appellate counsel for defendant automobile manufacturer in putative class action alleging actionable delay in providing free recall repair of defects in air bags. Trial court granted motion to dismiss based on lack of standing finding there was no injury since the alleged defect was eventually fixed for free. The Sixth Circuit affirmed finding the free repair, although delayed, “removed the defect” underlying the claims and thus the concrete injury necessary to prove standing was missing.