The Chrysler Pacifica has been the target of four notable class action lawsuits: a settled case over sudden engine stalling in 2017–2021 gas models, an active multidistrict litigation over fire risk in 2017–2018 plug-in hybrids, a pending case over spontaneous engine shutdowns in 2017–2023 hybrids, and a pending case over the UConnect infotainment system in 2017–2019 Pacificas and Chrysler 300s. Only the stalling case has produced a settlement, and its claim window has closed. The other three are still moving through the Eastern District of Michigan.
Stalling Defect Settlement in Moran v. FCA
The resolved case is Moran, et al. v. FCA US LLC, No. 3:17-CV-02594-JO-AHG, filed in the Southern District of California. It covered 2017–2021 Pacificas equipped with the 3.6-liter V6 and 9-speed automatic transmission, alleging the engine could stall without warning. FCA had already recalled roughly 154,000 gas-powered 2017 Pacificas in January 2018 under recall 18V-049 for an engine control software update.1NHTSA. Recall Report 18V-049 The class action argued the fix was inadequate and that the defect persisted across later model years.
The court granted final approval on February 21, 2023.2Top Class Actions. Chrysler Pacifica Stalling Defect Class Action Lawsuit Settlement The settlement extended the crankshaft position sensor warranty from three years or 36,000 miles to five years or 60,000 miles and let owners who had already paid for a sensor replacement seek reimbursement with their repair orders and proof of ownership.3CarComplaints.com. Chrysler Pacifica Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Reached Class members who believed their vehicle was a lemon could file for binding arbitration through DeMars & Associates, with eligibility determined under their state’s lemon law.4DeMars & Associates. Class Action Settlements
The claim deadline was August 21, 2023, and the settlement is closed. The opt-out and objection deadline had already passed on November 9, 2022. Owners who stayed in the class gave up the right to bring separate lemon law or auto fraud claims tied to the stalling defect.2Top Class Actions. Chrysler Pacifica Stalling Defect Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
Plug-In Hybrid Fire Risk MDL
The plug-in hybrid fire litigation is still open. In February 2022, FCA recalled nearly 20,000 model year 2017–2018 Pacifica PHEVs under recall 22V-077 after at least 12 spontaneous fires, some in vehicles that were parked and turned off.5ClassAction.org. Class Action Filed After Chrysler Pacifica Plug-In Hybrids Recalled for Fire Risk6NHTSA. Consumer Alert: Chrysler Pacifica PHEV Minivan Repair, Park Outside Recall7CaseMine. In Re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall Products Liability Litigation8Haag Global. Vehicle Fire When Parked: Chrysler Is Recalling Certain 2017–2018 Pacifica PHEV Vehicles
The lawsuits were consolidated as In re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3040, in the Eastern District of Michigan before Judge David M. Lawson. The consolidated amended complaint filed in June 2024 brings 164 counts under the laws of 29 states.7CaseMine. In Re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall Products Liability Litigation Plaintiffs’ counsel at Hagens Berman argued in a January 2024 motion that the software update was being called a repair when it only detected conditions leading to fire without preventing them, and cited fires in vehicles that had already received the update.9Hagens Berman. Hagens Berman Asks Federal Judge to Inform Owners Pacifica Hybrid Minivans Still at Risk of Spontaneous Fire Post-Recall
Key procedural developments:
- In February 2024, Judge Lawson denied FCA’s motion to compel arbitration, finding the company had waived that right through litigation conduct. In July 2025, the Sixth Circuit reversed, finding the district court had improperly raised the waiver issue on its own.10U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan. Opinion Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration, MDL 304011Inside Class Actions. Sixth Circuit Reverses Arbitration Denial in Chrysler Pacifica MDL
- In February 2025, the court excluded plaintiffs’ engineering expert Bradley Zigler after finding his factual premise was “indisputably wrong,” while allowing economist Edward Stockton to proceed on class-wide damages methods.7CaseMine. In Re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall Products Liability Litigation
- On January 21, 2025, the court granted in part and denied in part FCA’s second motion to dismiss, aimed at the re-pleaded common law claims.7CaseMine. In Re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall Products Liability Litigation
- As of December 2025, FCA was urging the court to dismiss the remaining claims, arguing most plaintiffs had not suffered an actual defect or financial loss.12Law360. FCA Says Drivers Lack Standing in Exploding Minivan MDL
Class certification has not been granted. The court suspended the certification deadline pending the outcome of an en banc rehearing in Speerly v. General Motors, LLC, and plaintiffs must file their motion within 21 days after that appeal concludes.13U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan. Opinion and Order on Expert Testimony and Procedural Matters, MDL 3040 No settlement, no trial date.
Hybrid Engine Shutdown Case: Kappes v. FCA
Kappes, et al. v. FCA US LLC, No. 2:23-cv-10259, was filed in February 2023 in the Eastern District of Michigan. It alleges that 2017–2023 Pacifica plug-in hybrids have a wiring defect in the transmission of the gasoline-driven portion of the powertrain, causing spontaneous engine shutdowns and total power loss at highway speeds. Counsel from Hagens Berman and The Miller Law Firm estimate roughly 67,000 vehicles are affected.14Hagens Berman. Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid Engine Shutdown Defect
Chrysler filed a recall report with NHTSA in January 2023 and issued a stop-sale. The proposed remedy was a software update meant to warn drivers before a shutdown so they could steer to safety. Plaintiffs called that an “inadequate stopgap” because it does not prevent the shutoff.14Hagens Berman. Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid Engine Shutdown Defect
In a March 2026 ruling, Judge Jonathan J.C. Grey dismissed the nationwide class claims, holding that the named plaintiffs lack standing to bring claims under the laws of states where they don’t reside or didn’t purchase their vehicles. Individual and state-specific sub-class claims survive. The court also found plaintiffs had not adequately pleaded FCA’s presale knowledge of the shutdown defect, weakening the fraud-based claims.15Michigan Lawyers Weekly. Kappes v. FCA US LLC Opinion and Order Thirteen plaintiffs are stayed pending arbitration issues; 23 are moving forward. A scheduling order was entered in April 2026, and the case is in discovery under a protective order as of mid-2026.16CourtListener. Kappes v. FCA US LLC Docket No class certification motion has been filed and no settlement is on the table.
UConnect Infotainment Case: Pistorio v. FCA
Pistorio, et al. v. FCA US LLC, No. 2:20-cv-11838, was filed in July 2020 in the Eastern District of Michigan. It covers the fourth-generation UConnect system in 2017–2019 Chrysler Pacifica and Chrysler 300 vehicles, alleging freezing, black screens, repeated reboots, and loss of the backup camera and navigation. Plaintiffs claim the system was the subject of at least 17 technical service bulletins and that authorized dealers frequently failed to provide permanent repairs.17ClassAction.org. Pistorio v. FCA US LLC Complaint
A federal judge ruled that the named plaintiffs cannot represent a nationwide class because they did not allege injuries in states outside their own. The court upheld breach of warranty claims under the laws of Alabama, California, Florida, Michigan, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, along with most of the fraud claims. The case remains pending, with Berger Montague, The Miller Law Firm, Capstone Law, and Haffner Law representing plaintiffs.18Top Class Actions. Drivers Can’t Represent Nationwide Class in Defective Chrysler Infotainment System Class Action, Judge Says
What Pacifica Owners Can Do Now
If your vehicle is a 2017–2021 gas Pacifica with the 3.6-liter V6 and 9-speed transmission, the Moran settlement’s deadlines are gone. Owners who remained in the class are bound by its terms and cannot bring separate lemon law or fraud claims over the stalling defect. Anyone who opted out before November 9, 2022 kept the right to sue individually.
If your vehicle is a 2017–2018 Pacifica PHEV covered by the fire recalls, confirm the repairs have been done. Owners can call Chrysler Customer Assistance at 800-853-1403 or check their VIN through NHTSA’s recall lookup at NHTSA.gov/recalls.6NHTSA. Consumer Alert: Chrysler Pacifica PHEV Minivan Repair, Park Outside Recall The MDL and the Kappes case have not been certified as classes and have not settled. If either reaches settlement or certification, affected owners will receive notice with the chance to participate or opt out.
Owners who believe their vehicle qualifies as a lemon under state law may have individual options outside any class action. FCA offers no-cost arbitration through the National Center for Dispute Settlement; the company is bound by the arbitrator’s decision, but the owner is not required to accept it. California residents should note that as of July 1, 2025, state law requires at least 30 days’ written notice to FCA before filing a civil penalty action under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.19Mopar. Lemon Law Information