The Wisconsin Court of Appeals on Wednesday gave its first ruling on how dashcam evidence would be treated at the appellate level. A three-judge panel decided that the proper legal standard when evaluating a video is to overturn a trial judge’s decision only it is “clearly erroneous.”

The context was provided by the November 4, 2009 arrest of Jeffrey D. Walli in Sheboygan. The court was asked to determine whether Sheboygan Police Officer Brandon Munnik had a valid reason for pulling Walli over in the first place. Munnik claimed that around 11:22pm Walli’s car nearly sideswiped him, so he flipped on his emergency lights, which triggered his dashboard-mounted video camera, and gave chase. Munnik testified that the resulting video showed Walli’s car over the center line and was a legitimate traffic violation. Walli’s attorney disagreed with that take.

Members of the public are not allowed to attend red light camera trials and other proceedings at the Superior Court of California courthouse in the city of Corona. For the past several weeks a policy has been place denying entry to anyone who does not have a direct involvement in a specific case scheduled that day. Court security checks anyone attempting to enter the building.

“Please be advised that this court facility is closed to the general public,” a sign posted at the door states. “The facility conducts criminal trials Monday through Friday and only jurors, witnesses and associated trial personnel are permitted to enter. On Fridays, the facility is also open for litigants reporting for court trial on traffic or minor offense matters.”

The Missouri state Senate yesterday voted to require local jurisdictions to adhere to minimum standards for yellow warning time at intersections. State Senator Jim Lembke (R-St. Louis), an opponent of the use of red light cameras, introduced amendments to an omnibus transportation bill designed to limit the desirability of photo enforcement. His colleagues went along with language mandating that signals on all roads adhere to the bare minimum “nationally recognized engineering standards.”

Speaking your mind to a police officer during a traffic stop is not free speech, according to the Tenth Circuit US Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel ruled Thursday that Colorado Springs, Colorado Police Officer Duaine Peters did nothing wrong in having Miriam Leverington fired from her job as a nurse at Memorial Health System for talking back after he wrote her a speeding citation.

Ohio’s supreme court has a long history of defending traffic tickets, whether they happen to be issued by police or a machine. The court on Wednesday maintained this tradition in tossing out a constitutional challenge to the photo enforcement hearing process, denying the challengers the chance to present their case in full.

We have documented extensively how Beijing’s license plate lottery mucked-up the car market of China’s capital. Now, Beijingers found a creative way to get their sought-after license play without bothering Lady Luck: They go to court.

There is a Police Equipment Show in Beijing, and it’s a meeting of the minds: Chinese cops want to get out of their Santana wagons (read gen 2 Passat Variant), and Chinese carmakers want a slice of the lucrative government pie. Our friend Tycho of ChinaCarNews (formerly known as TheTycho.com) went to the show and took his camera along. Above a uniformed Shanghai-Volkswagen Passat Lingyu, the logical successor of the ubiquitous Shanghai-Volkswagen Santana. More Chinese police after the jump …

Less than a year after the Florida legislature enacted legislation authorizing the use of photo enforcement, the state House of Representatives wants to reverse course. By a 59 to 57 vote yesterday lawmakers approved a bill repealing the provisions of the Mark Wandall Act.

“The unequivocal data that I’ve seen is that these intersections have become more dangerous not less dangerous with the advent of red light cameras,” bill sponsor Representative Richard Corcoran (R-New Port Richey) said. “All the data I’ve looked at has shown overwhelmingly that these intersections become less safe.”

Volkswagen was all grins when litigating hedgies lost the first round in court in the U.S. (it’s on appeal) and when the public prosecutor in Stuttgart dropped some of the investigation into former Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking and former CFO Holger Härter (only to add new angles.) Until the matters are cleared, Volkswagen and Porsche officially are not married, unofficially, they share all available beds.

Now, a new lawsuit causes frozen faces and acid reflux at the very top of Volkswagen: German investment funds intend to involve prominent supervisory board members of Volkswagen AG in a billion dollar court case.

The Brazilian autoblogosphere is up in arms because of an alleged censoring attempt by Toyota do Brasil. A month after the Brazilian blog Notícias Automotivas had run a piece on the upcoming Toyota Corolla S, they received a letter from Toyota do Brasil’s Legal Department. The Corolla S looks like not much more than a customized Corolla with red stitching on faux racing seats. The letter, dated April 29, 2011, looks scary.

We have received what we believe is a faithful translation of the letter from Brazilian Portuguese Legalese to English. The letter demands, within 24 hours of receipt, the takedown of the whole story, plus something unheard of:

The Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) today released A Decade of Decline in Person Crossings From Mexico and Canada into the United States, a review of the 10-year decline in border crossings by. “This report examines the trends in person crossings by mode rather than reasons for the decline,” says a DOT press release. In the quest for reasons, Ed and I road-tested the entry from Canada last night. We might have found an answer for the decline:

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled yesterday in favor of police officers who attach GPS tracking devices to vehicles without first obtaining a warrant. The three-judge panel insisted searches of this sort do not violate the Fourth Amendment after considering the case of Juan Cuevas-Perez.

Washington state’s second highest court endorsed the growing municipal practice of using extended vehicle impound periods to rack up fees. The a three-judge court of appeals panel considered the question in the context of whether Raymond Mann’s vehicle was rightly taken for thirty days by Kent police on March 13, 2009.

California’s second highest court has no interest in dealing with parking tickets. A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal on April 12 rendered a decision in a case involving nothing more than a disputed $44 parking ticket. Motorist Angelica Guevara argued that the citation she received on December 28, 2008 for parking in Bell was void because the city failed to provide adequate notice of overnight restrictions. The justices made it clear they will not consider the merits of this or any other parking case.

The highest court in Massachusetts ruled Tuesday that a police officer is not justified in stopping and searching an automobile merely because he smells the presence of marijuana. The Supreme Judicial Court took up the case of Benjamin Cruz to clarify the legal impact of a 2008 voter referendum that had decriminalized possession of less than one ounce of pot in the Bay State.

The Los Angeles, California police commission voted 3-2 on Tuesday to approve a report defending the status quo regarding the use of red light cameras. In January, the city council tasked the commission with reviewing a report by Safer Streets LA that found the department had misrepresented accident statistics to make the program appear effective ( view report, 250k PDF). Another report suggested lengthening yellow times one second beyond the bare minimum would reduce violations and accidents ( view report, 450k PDF). A third report concluded that 75 percent of tickets were issued for rolling right turns, which have never been a significant cause of accidents in Los Angeles ( view report).

An ongoing federal lawsuit against the speed trap town of Ridgeland, South Carolina uncovered internal emails last month that shed light on the motivation behind the state’s only photo enforcement program. Since July 2010, Ridgeland has allowed the private firm iTraffic to operate a mobile speed camera van on Interstate 95, despite a state law outlawing the practice and a pair of attorney general opinions warning that the photo ticketing was not legal ( view opinions).

Ticket quotas seem to be one of those facts of life that exists, unexamined, in law enforcement departments around the country. But this week the concept has been dragged out into the light of the justice system, as two LAPD officers have won a lawsuit against their department’s ticket quota system. The LAT reports:

Officers Howard Chan and David Benioff, veteran motor officers with the LAPD’s West Traffic Division, sued the department in 2009, alleging that their captain mandated each motor officer to write 18 tickets a day, according to the suit.

In addition to the quota, officers were told the tickets they gave out had to be for “major movers” such as speeding, lane straddling or running a red light — offenses that could each generate revenue of several hundred dollars each.

The civil court jury sided with the officers by a vote of 11 to 1. The damage award [of $2m] was for loss of reputation and specific employment actions against the officers by the department affecting their careers after they reported the misconduct and refused to meet the quotas.

The department defended itself by arguing that, rather than a specific quota, the department had broad goals intended to reduce injuries and fatalities. That argument was roundly rejected by the jury, which found in favor of the suing officers 11-1, after a former LAPD commander testified that gas prices and paramedic response times had far more to do with injury and fatality levels. With any luck, this ruling may even create precedent to eliminate quota systems around the country. Meanwhile, MyFoxLA reports that the LAPD is appealing the ruling.

The city council in Highland, California decided three years ago to allow an Australian company, Redflex Traffic Systems, issue tickets at two intersections. Nearly 4300 “violations” have been generated since August 2008, each worth nearly $500. A committee of the council opened debate yesterday on whether the automated ticketing machine contract should be renewed. When the same question was debated last year, officials focused on safety.

The California Senate Appropriations committee voted 9-0 on March 29 to advance legislation that would alter the way red light cameras operate in the state. State Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) re-introduced legislation that had stalled last year tweaking some of the more controversial aspects of automated ticketing programs.

Judges in the country’s most activist federal circuit on Thursday ruled in favor of red light camera use in Washington state. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals issued an unpublished memorandum order dismissing a state law challenge to the photo fine amounts and “cost neutrality” compensation arrangements of municipalities.

Lawmakers in four states this week advanced legislation that would, if passed, either place mild restrictions on or outright ban the use of automated ticketing machines by municipalities. The Florida state Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday voted 4 to 2 to approve an outright prohibition on the use of red light cameras — just one year after the legislature had given in to the lobbying effort of localities in authorizing their use. Senate Bill 672 must now clear the Senate Community Affairs Committee before being considered by the full Senate.

Tesla has sued Top Gear for depicting its Roadster running out of electricity in the 2008 segment shown above. According to the San Jose Mercury News, Tesla is suing because

Top Gear’s allegation that the car’s range is 55 miles is defamatory because it suggests Tesla “grossly misled potential purchasers of the Roadster,”

But Top Gear spokesfolks tell the BBC

We can confirm that we have received notification that Tesla have issued proceedings against the BBC. The BBC stands by the programme and will be vigorously defending this claim.

And, as long as the Tesla Roadster that Top Gear tested was a first-generation machine (and we think it is), Tesla’s going to have a little problem making the case that the BBC defamed their car…

Red light cameras continue to generate controversy in a pair of Texas towns located off Galveston Bay. Last week, Baytown responded to the lawsuit filed by photo enforcement vendor American Traffic Solutions (ATS) in Harris County court on St. Valentine’s Day alleging breach of contract. The quarrel between the two parties began when voters overruled the city council’s decision to implement automated ticketing machines by imposing a requirement that police personally witness each alleged violation. ATS decided it would not earn sufficient revenue under such an arrangement and pulled out.

Every state in the union has its own laws regarding a manufacturer’s ability to sell cars, with some states banning the practice outright and others merely preventing OEMs from competing with their own dealer networks. California falls into this latter category, as the California New Motor Vehicle Board bans manufacturers from owning dealerships within ten miles of other same-make independently owned stores. But that apparently did not stop Chrysler from opening a dealership in Los Angeles which, according to a petition filed by the California New Car Dealers Association, is within ten miles of not one, but three independent Chrysler stores.

A Grand Jury in Napa, California last month issued a report calling for reform and refunds in the city’s red light camera program. The jurors uncovered yellow light timing discrepancies and an unusual dependence upon right-turn tickets to generate revenue at the most productive intersection. The Australian vendor Redflex Traffic Systems began issuing tickets in May 2009, and citations at four intersections now cost $475 each. So far, 9278 tickets worth $4 million have been mailed — 3789 of which were sent to vehicle owners that turned right on red.

A Los Angeles County, California court last month distanced itself from judicial colleagues in defending the use of red light cameras. A three-judge appellate division panel on February 14 upheld the validity of photo ticketing despite the contrary holdings of the appellate division in Alameda, Kern, Orange, San Bernardino and San Mateo counties.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Friday decided that photo enforcement vendors American Traffic Solutions (ATS) and Redflex were too much at odds with one another to participate in a court mediation program designed to settle tough cases without going to trial. Each firm has filed suit questioning the integrity and ethics of the other. Redflex refers to “ATS’ pattern and practice of consistent false representations.” ATS, in turn, claims Redflex has been making “false and misleading statements of fact concerning its photographic traffic enforcement products and services.”

Now and then a story comes along that’s right in a writer’s wheelhouse. Yesterday, Chrysler filed a lawsuit in US District Court alleging that Pure Detroit, a small chain of gift shops specializing in Motor City memorabilia, was infringing on their trademark “Imported From Detroit” tagline, popularized in Chrysler’s Super Bowl ad starring rapper Eminem. Pure Detroit started selling their version of the shirts on Feb. 7th, the day after the Super Bowl, followed by Chrysler’s own shirts a few days later, which sold out in short order. Chrysler is donating the profits from those sales to Detroit area charities, and the company says that it tried to work out a similar arrangement with Pure Detroit. Pure Detroit did agree to stop online sales, but they continued to sell the shirts in their retail stores, resulting in the lawsuit. Courts have been pretty consistent that owners of intellectual property have to diligently defend it. According to a leading intellectual property attorney, in this case the courts should side with the Auburn Hills automaker, not the small stores in downtown Detroit.

Sometimes news stories don’t need commentary. This little item, from orange.co.uk, seems like one of those stories:

Simona Suhoi, 28, faces up to five years in jail after police found her behind the wheel a month after she was banned from driving.

The former singer and designer, who is known as Simona Sensual, was pulled her over for not wearing a seatbelt in her home city of Bucharest.

She said: “I admit I shouldn’t have driven the car but I had no other choice.

“You see, I was having terrible pains in the chest, I think it was because of these brand new breast implants.

“I tried to get a taxi but they were all busy so I jumped into the car and dashed for the clinic. I mean, what was I supposed to do?”

And aren’t two airbags safer than one seatbelt anyway? You’ve been a great crowd, don’t forget to tip your waitresses.

I’ve dispatched one of TTAC’s writers to get to the bottom of the copyright fight that’s surrounding Chrysler’s “Imported From Detroit” tagline, as Reuters reports that Chrysler’s claim to the line may not actually hold up.
Chrysler applied to trademark the slogan for use on clothing, bags and other wearable items in January. An attorney for Pure Detroit said the company did not start selling the T-shirts until after the ad aired in early February.

[Moda’s] attorney, John VanOphem, said Chrysler cannot trademark the phrase because it is “merely descriptive.”

“Our position is that Chrysler is trying to claim ownership of something it doesn’t have a right to own,” VanOphem said. “They do not own any exclusive rights to the ‘Imported from Detroit’ phrase.”Chrysler applied to trademark the slogan for use on clothing, bags and other wearable items in January. An attorney for Pure Detroit said the company did not start selling the T-shirts until after the ad aired in early February.

But the attorney, John VanOphem, said Chrysler cannot trademark the phrase because it is “merely descriptive.”

“Our position is that Chrysler is trying to claim ownership of something it doesn’t have a right to own,” VanOphem said. “They do not own any exclusive rights to the ‘Imported from Detroit’ phrase.”

Meanwhile, another battle over automotive copyrights may yet be brewing: Saab has introduced its own answer to SYNC and Onstar, named IQon, a term which may be in conflict with Nissan’s display technology used in the Juke, named I-Con. Hit the jump to see a video of the Nissan system in action, and let us know if you think Saab is going to have to come up with a new name, or if copyright law will let both of these naems coexist.

Fourteen state senators want to do away with safety inspections for vehicles in the North Carolina. Led by state Senator Stan Bingham (R-Denton), the group introduced Senate Bill 123 last month in response to a 2008 legislative report suggesting the benefit of imposing the $165 million annual burden on motorists has yielded no measurable safety benefit.

Each year, the state’s 6.1 million vehicles must be taken to a private station for a $13.60 safety inspection. Vehicles registered in half of the state’s counties must also take a $30 emissions test. The state only keeps 85 cents out of the safety inspection fee, with the remainder kept by the inspector who also earns significant revenue by repairing whatever faults he discovers.

Police in Massachusetts may no longer stop a car merely because a laser jammer or aftermarket backup camera partially obscures the motto on a license plate. A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals decided on March 2 that the state police had no business pulling over Patrick H. Miller simply because the phrase “Spirit of America” at the bottom of his plate was partially covered as he drove on Route 93 South in Stoneham on April 30, 2009.

Wenatchee, Washington is suing to stop the public from circulating a petition that would thwart the use of red light cameras and speed cameras in the city of 28,000. In March 2009, Wenatchee officials signed a contract with American Traffic Solutions (ATS), and they claimed this agreement would be “impaired” if voters had a say in whether or not the program should continue, according to the complaint filed last Tuesday in a Chelan County court.

“The city seeks a declaration that the proposed Wenatchee Initiative No. 1 is invalid because it is beyond the scope of the initiative power and violates the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution,” Steve D. Smith, attorney for the city, wrote.

Red light running all but disappeared at a New Jersey intersection after the duration of the yellow light warning time was increased under threat of a lawsuit. Glassboro gave the private company American Traffic Solutions (ATS) permission to issue red light camera tickets at the intersection of William Dalton Drive and Delsea Drive on March 26. The location was so successful at issuing $85 tickets that it generated $1 million worth of notices within just seven months.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott does not want anything even resembling a speed camera to operate in the Lone Star State. In an opinion handed down yesterday, Abbott denied the request of the city of Plano’s request to use handheld laser speed guns equipped with cameras and GPS devices on the grounds that doing so would violate a Texas law that bans automated photo radar devices.

After accepting more than three dozen campaign checks from registered photo enforcement lobbyists and other interested parties, Missouri’s attorney general on Thursday handed down a decision endorsing the use of automated ticketing machines despite significant legal controversy. Former Attorney General Jay Nixon stated when the city of Arnold started using red light cameras in 2005 that he believed tickets sent in the mail were not valid. The office of current Attorney General Chris Koster, however, issued a letter to state Senator Jim Lembke (R-St. Louis) defending the practice.

The first thing I ask any company that wants to do anything in China is: “Did you register your trademark?” Usually, they did not. I either help them registering it (costs around $1,000). If they refuse, I won’t work with them. It would be a waste of time. All too often someone else in China sees a value in that trademark. Being a “first to file” country, anybody can file any trademark in China that isn’t already filed – in China. Getting your trademark back is a long, expensive, and often hopeless case.

Ignorance takes another victim: Land Rover.

A police officer in Houston, Texas thought he had a slam dunk case against a motorist he stopped for driving on the wrong side of the road on September 15, 2008. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in a February 10 decision overturned the stop on the grounds that driving on the wrong side of the road is not always against the law.

Yesterday, Porsche went through more mood swings in a single day than a manic depressive in three months. In the morning, Munich’s Süddeutsche Zeitung, usually well clued into high level auto gossip in Germany, had the good news that the public prosecutor in Stuttgart had dropped most of the investigation into former Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking and former CFO Holger Härter. Supposedly, no evidence of share price manipulation was found. With that out of the way, the formal amalgamation of Porsche into Volkswagen could now progress at full speed, said the paper. However, they were misinformed.

In what may be one of the most important Supreme Court rulings for the car industry in some time [full opinion in PDF here], the highest court in the land has found that compliance with minimum federal safety standards is not a defense against personal injury or wrongful death suits brought in state courts. The case in question involved a 2002 accident in which Than Williamson was killed when a Jeep Wrangler hit her family’s 1993 Mazda MPV. The Williamson MPV had only lap belts because shoulder belts weren’t required by federal law until 2007. A California court has already barred the lawsuit from coming forward, arguing that federal regulations supersede any local rulings, and that then-legal seatbelts should protect manufacturers from personal injury liability. But in the wake of another ruling involving pharmaceutical companies, it seemed that the court might overturn that ruling, which it now has.

The issue, according to Justice Stephen Breyer’s majority opinion, comes down to the government’s intent. A previous ruling had held thata different portion of (an older version of) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 (FMVSS 208)—a portion that required installation of passive restraint devices—pre-empted a state tort suit that sought to hold an auto manufacturer liable for failure to install a particular kind of passive restraint, namely, airbags. We found that the federal regulation intended to assure manufacturers that they would retain a choice of installing any of several different passive restraint devices. And the regulation sought to assure them that they would not have to exercise this choice in favor of airbags. For that reason we thought that the federal regulation pre-empted a state tort suit that, by premising tort liability on a failure to install airbags, would have deprived the manufacturers of had assured them.The lower courts used this logic to protect Mazda from a lawsuit by the Williamson family, but the Supreme Court found that in the case of three-point seat belts, however, the issue changes. When it comes to the previous ruling about airbags, wrote Breyer,That regulation required manufacturers to equip their vehicles with passive restraint systems, thereby providing occupants with automatic accident protection. But that regulation also gave manufacturers a choice among several different passive restraint systems, including airbags and automatic seatbelts. By requiring manufacturers to install airbags (in order to avoid tort liability) the tort suit would have deprived the manufacturers of the choice among passive restraint systems that the federal regulation gave them.In that case,the regulation’s history, the agency’s contemporaneous explanation, and its consistently held interpretive views indicated that the regulation sought to maintain manufacturer choice in order to further significant regulatory objectives.But, in this casethese same considerations indicate the contrary. We consequently conclude that, even though the state tort suit may restrict the manufacturer’s choice, it does not “stan as an obstacle to the accomplishment . . . of the full purposes and objectives” of federal law. Thus, the regulation does not pre-empt this tort action.Why?The more important reason why DOT did not require lap-and-shoulder belts for rear inner seats was that it thought that this requirement would not be cost-effective. The agency explained that it would be significantly more expensive for manufacturers to install lap-and-shoulder belts in rear middle and aisle seats than in seats next to the car doors. Ibid. But that fact—the fact that DOT made a negative judgment about cost effectiveness— cannot by itself show that DOT sought to forbid common- law tort suits in which a judge or jury might reach a different conclusion. For one thing, DOT did not believe that costs would remain frozen. Rather it pointed out that costs were falling as manufacturers were “voluntarily equipping more and more of their vehicles with rear seat lap/shoulder belts.”…to infer from the mere existence of such a cost-effectiveness judgment that the federal agency intends to bar States from impos- ing stricter standards would treat all such federal standards as if they were maximum standards, eliminating the possibility that the federal agency seeks only to set forth a minimum standard potentially supplemented through state tort law. We cannot reconcile this consequence with a statutory saving clause that foresees the likelihood of a continued meaningful role for state tort law.It’s a complicated ruling that centers on regulatory intent, but it’s already having a huge impact. Bloomberg reports:Auto shares plunged following the ruling. Ford Motor Co. shares fell as much as 4.38 percent to $14.44, the lowest price since Nov. 3. Ford fell 43 cents, or 2.8 percent, to $14.80 at 10:27 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. General Motors Co. fell 48 cents, or 1.3 percent, to $35.30.This is definitely a ruling to remember if and when the Motor Vehicle Safety Act comes back to congress.

A consensus is growing among the appellate divisions of the California Superior Court that red light camera evidence currently offered by private companies does not meet the appropriate legal standard of proof. In December, a three-judge appeals panel in San Bernardino handed down a unanimous decision reversing the photo ticket issued to motorist John Macias.

Macias received a ticket in the mail after his car was photographed in Victorville on January 10, 2009 making a slow right-hand turn at a light that had been red for 0.36 seconds. His attorney, Robert D. Conaway, argued that when San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Deputy Baker testified as a witness against Macias, Baker had no personal knowledge of the facts of the case. As such, his evidence was hearsay.

A group of motorists earlier this month filed a federal class action lawsuit against Florida’s toll road system for detaining motorists who attempt to pay the tolls with cash. About 600 miles worth of toll roads and bridges are under the jurisdiction of The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), which hands operational duties over to the private firm Faneuil, Inc., which is responsible for the toll collectors. The complaint charges both firms with false imprisonment and other civil rights violations.

“For approximately four years, FDOT and Faneuil have engaged in a practice of detaining motorists and their passengers on the Turnpike System until such motorists provided certain personal information in exchange for their release,” attorney James C. Valenti wrote on behalf of the plaintiffs. “The motorists and passengers have been detained without their consent and without legal justification.”

Arizona is home to the oldest continuously operating speed camera programs and the US headquarters for the two largest private companies that operate the equipment. It could also be the latest state to join the fifteen jurisdictions that ban automated ticketing machines. The Arizona Senate Government Reform Committee voted 5 to 1 on Wednesday to approve legislation repealing the statutes that have allowed the use of red light cameras and speed cameras in the state. The move represents a significant reversal for a legislature that in the previous session introduced no significant legislation to curtail photo enforcement thanks to a leadership that fully backed the program.

Automotive News [sub] reports:

Sixty-four dealerships that were terminated during Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy reorganization sued the U.S. Treasury Department today, seeking at least $130 million.

The suit, filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims here, alleges the government violated the Constitution by taking the stores’ franchises and their state legal rights without adequate compensation.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that more dealers could come on board, as the 64 suing dealers represent only eight percent of Chrysler’s cull. Neither Treasury nor Chrysler (which is not named in the suit) have commented. The suit, which can be read in its entirety in PDF format here, claims violation of Fifth Amendment rights, arguing that:

[the dealer cull] served the public purpose of promoting stability to the financial system of the United States… This is a loss that should not, however, be borne by a few individual dealers but, by reason of its broad and salutary public purpose, must in fairness and justice be borne by the public as a whole.

Automotive News [sub] reports that Global Vehicles, a firm with a contract to distribute Mahindra pickup trucks in the US, has dropped its lawsuit in US court in an apparent attempt to rescue its distribution deal. The contract between Mahindra and GV called for British arbitration of disputes, and apparently the British arbitration panel required that all claims be handled through it rather than in US courts. The dropped suit would have required Mahindra to press forward with its US launch regardless of pending arbitration. Mahindra, meanwhile, has said it is looking outside of its deal with GV for a US distributor, so it’s not clear if GV’s olive branch will even make a difference.

Traffic camera vendor American Traffic Solutions showed no municipal love as it filed a breach of contract suit against Baytown, Texas on Monday. The St. Valentine’s Day complaint accused the city of failing to approve the mailing of an expected number of red light camera citations generated by the company.

The Virginia House of Delegates and a state Senate committee approved legislation that would make a rolling right-hand turn on a red light a reckless driving offense. On Thursday the Senate Transportation Committee unanimously approved a bill introduced by Delegate Bill Janis (R-Glen Allen) which the lower chamber had approved by a 67 to 31 margin on February 4.

“Any person who drives a motor vehicle in violation of Section 46.2-833 is guilty of reckless driving,” House Bill 1993 states.

The owner of a family van was surprised to receive a ticket in the mail from police in the southern Italian town of Oria accusing him of driving 1230 km/h (764 MPH). The Lizzanello resident had been driving his Fiat Doblo on the SS7 in the province of Brindisi on November 6 and weeks later received a letter demanding that he pay 165 euros (US $223).

Italian tickets allow a five percent tolerance to account for the possibility of error. At 1230 km/h, the motorist exceeded the 90 km/h (56 MPH) speed limit with an adjusted velocity of 1078 km/h (669 MPH), according to the notice signed by two officers ( view ticket). Oria police insist that the camera managed by the private firm Sodi Scientifica SpA is perfectly accurate. Officials blamed the incident “clerical error” in a statement issued Thursday.

In the brouhaha over Ferrari’s alleged trademark violation, Ferrari did the smart thing and surrendered. Ferrari withdrew the “F150” name for its new Formula One race car. Ford had brought suit in federal court, alleging that “Ferrari has misappropriated the F-150 trademark in naming its new racing vehicle the ‘F150′ in order to capitalize on and profit from the substantial goodwill that Ford has developed in the F-150 trademark.”

The South Dakota House of Representatives voted 43 to 24 on Tuesday to prohibit the use of red light cameras and speed cameras in the state. A bipartisan group of lawmakers led by state Representative Peggy Gibson (D-Huron) took aim at the controversial automated ticketing machine set up in Sioux Falls, describing the due process denied innocent motorists ticketed by the system.

“My constituent not only did not own the car that was photographed, but she was not even in Sioux Falls at the time,” Gibson said Tuesday. “In other words, she was presumed guilty of a traffic violation she did not commit in a car she did not own, but she had to go to great lengths to prove her innocence.”

The Eleventh Circuit US Court of Appeals on Tuesday saw no problem with jailing a man for eight hours after he blew .03 on a breathalyzer — far below the legal limit. Santa Rosa County, Florida sheriff’s deputies had arrested Roger A. Festa on the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) on April 9, 2005. Since he had been entirely sober, Festa sued Deputy Adam Teichner and Deputy Douglas Burgett for unlawful arrest.

You think only China has a total disregard for intellectual property? Ford filed a trademark infringement suit on Wednesday against a foreign carmaker. The only thing this carmaker has in common with China is their love for the red color. Ford sued Ferrari for blatantly stealing the name of the world’s best selling vehicle, the F-150.

A century ago, the forerunners of the American Automobile Association (AAA) provided a service that warned motorists about upcoming speed traps. AAA Carolinas turned away from this history and used its considerable influence on Monday to support a speed trap declared illegal by South Carolina’s attorney general and several of its lawmakers. Since August, the tiny town of Ridgeland has allowed a private company to operate a speed camera on Interstate 95 in direct defiance of a state law enacted in June specifically to stop the program ( view law).

“All branches of government are facing constricting budgets,” a AAA Carolinas statement explained. “Law enforcement agencies will not be able to simply add staff to handle the growing traffic volume and therefore must look to creative solutions to do more with less. This photo-radar enforcement program in the Town of Ridgeland is one such example and should be replicated as opposed to rejected.”

Anonymous informants may direct police to pull over any motorist regardless of whether the other driver has committed any traffic offenses under a ruling handed down by the Michigan Court of Appeals last week. The state’s second highest court reversed the finding of a circuit court that had insisted on police officers having probable cause before initiating a traffic stop.

The court considered a March 17, 2008 incident in which Michigan State Trooper Christopher Bommarito was on patrol in the city of Southgate. As Bommarito was heading out of a parking lot, a woman behind the wheel of a red pickup truck pointed at a nearby car and mouthed the phrase “almost hit me.” Bommarito immediately activated his siren and entered into hot pursuit. He had no other information aside from the point when he pulled over Shaun David Barbarich who was later arrested for drunk driving.

Robert writes:

I just replaced the engine in my 2005 Porsche 911 due to the failure of the INTERMEDIATE SHAFT. I would like to know just how widespread the problem is with 911’s and other Porsche models too. Why?

I am considering filing a lawsuit against Porsche to recover the costs associated with replacing the engine. If you have had an INTERMEDIATE SHAFT failure and have an interest in joining in my lawsuit or simply sharing your experience please contact me: westsidetravelmedicineATgmail.com