IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF [COUNTY] COUNTY, MISSOURI

Division No. [] | Case No. []

[PLAINTIFF NAME],
  Plaintiff,

v.

[DEFENDANT MANUFACTURER NAME], a [State of Incorporation] corporation,
  Defendant.

PETITION FOR DAMAGES, VEHICLE REPLACEMENT, AND OTHER STATUTORY RELIEF (MISSOURI LEMON LAW)

[// GUIDANCE: This template is drafted for a consumer-plaintiff bringing an automobile “lemon” action under Missouri’s New Motor Vehicle Warranties Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 407.560–.579 (2023). Customize bracketed terms and add factual detail, repair records, and exhibits as appropriate for the specific case.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Parties ……………………………………………………………………………… 2
II. Jurisdiction & Venue …………………………………………………………… 2
III. Defined Terms …………………………………………………………………… 3
IV. Factual Allegations ……………………………………………………………… 5
V. Causes of Action ………………………………………………………………… 7
 Count 1 – Violation of Missouri Lemon Law ……………………………… 7
 Count 2 – Breach of Express Warranty (U.C.C.) ………………………… 9
 Count 3 – Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ………………………………… 10
VI. Prayer for Relief ………………………………………………………………… 11
VII. Demand for Jury Trial ………………………………………………………… 12
VIII. Rule 55.03 Certification ……………………………………………………… 12
IX. Verification ……………………………………………………………………… 12
X. Certificate of Service …………………………………………………………… 13

I. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] (“Plaintiff”) is an individual of lawful age residing at [Address], [City], Missouri [ZIP] and is the owner/lessee of the Vehicle described herein.

2. Defendant [DEFENDANT MANUFACTURER NAME] (“Manufacturer”) is a corporation organized under the laws of [State] with its principal place of business at [Address] and may be served through its registered agent, [Registered Agent Name and Address], pursuant to § 506.150, RSMo.

[// GUIDANCE: Add additional defendants, e.g., selling dealership or component suppliers, as warranted.]

II. JURISDICTION & VENUE

3. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under Mo. Const. art. V, § 14 and § 407.579, RSMo, which grants a civil remedy to consumers injured by violations of the Missouri New Motor Vehicle Warranties Act.

4. Venue is proper in this Circuit under § 508.010, RSMo because:
    a. The transaction giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in this county; and/or
    b. Defendant transacts business and made representations within this county.

5. The amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed the total purchase price of the Vehicle and incidental damages allowed by statute, and is therefore within the monetary jurisdiction of this Court.

III. DEFINED TERMS

For clarity and consistency, the following terms are used with the meanings set forth below:

“Act” – The Missouri New Motor Vehicle Warranties Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 407.560–.579 (2023).

“Arbitration Program” – Any informal dispute settlement procedure established by Manufacturer purported to comply with 16 C.F.R. part 703 and § 407.573, RSMo.

“Days Out of Service” – Calendar days during which the Vehicle was unavailable to Plaintiff due to inspection, diagnosis, or repair of a Nonconformity.

“First Repair Attempt Date” – The date of the first attempted repair of a claimed Nonconformity within the applicable warranty period.

“Nonconformity” – Any defect, condition, or serious safety issue that substantially impairs the use, value, or safety of the Vehicle, as defined in § 407.560(4), RSMo.

“Reasonable Number of Attempts” – (i) four or more repair attempts for the same Nonconformity, or (ii) thirty or more cumulative Days Out of Service within the earlier of the warranty period or one year from the Vehicle’s delivery to Plaintiff, see § 407.567, RSMo.

“Vehicle” – The new [Year] [Make] [Model] automobile bearing Vehicle Identification Number (“VIN”) [VIN] purchased by Plaintiff on [Purchase Date].

[// GUIDANCE: Add or delete defined terms to match case-specific allegations; ensure consistent capitalization throughout.]

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. The Purchase and Warranty

6. On or about [Purchase Date], Plaintiff purchased the Vehicle from [Selling Dealership] for a total price of $[Purchase Price], inclusive of taxes, fees, and service contracts. A true and correct copy of the Retail Installment Contract/Buyer’s Order is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

7. At the time of sale, Manufacturer issued to Plaintiff an express written warranty covering the Vehicle for [Warranty Term] miles/ months (“Express Warranty”), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B. The Express Warranty promised, inter alia, to repair or replace any parts found defective in material or workmanship during the warranty period.

B. Emergence of the Nonconformities

8. Within [Number] miles and no later than [Date], the Vehicle exhibited one or more Nonconformities, including but not limited to [Detailed Description of Defects – e.g., engine stalling, transmission failure, electrical system malfunction, air-bag warning lights] (collectively, the “Defects”).

9. From [First Repair Attempt Date] through [Last Repair Attempt Date], Plaintiff tendered the Vehicle to authorized Manufacturer service facilities on [Number] separate occasions for diagnosis and repair of the Defects. Summaries of each repair visit, mileage, and Days Out of Service are set forth in Exhibit C (Repair Log).

10. Despite these efforts, the Defects persist. The Vehicle remains unreliable and unsafe for ordinary use, has diminished market value, and poses an unreasonable risk of harm.

C. Statutory Notices and Opportunity to Cure

11. Pursuant to § 407.567(5), RSMo, on [Notice Date] Plaintiff mailed Manufacturer a written notice of the Nonconformities and a request for final repair opportunity. A copy of said notice and proof of mailing are attached as Exhibit D.

12. Manufacturer either (i) failed to make the Vehicle conform after the final opportunity, or (ii) refused to take further action. Accordingly, the statutory remedy period has expired.

D. Exhaustion of Informal Dispute Resolution (If Applicable)

13. Manufacturer maintains an Arbitration Program branded [Program Name]. Plaintiff submitted a claim on [Arbitration Filing Date], participated in the hearing on [Hearing Date], and received a decision on [Decision Date]. The decision failed to award the full statutory relief. Copies of all pertinent arbitration documents are attached as Exhibit E.

– or –

13. Manufacturer does not maintain an informal dispute settlement mechanism that complies with § 407.573, RSMo and 16 C.F.R. part 703. Accordingly, exhaustion is not required.

[// GUIDANCE: Use one of the above parag. 13 options; delete the other.]

V. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT 1 – VIOLATION OF MISSOURI NEW MOTOR VEHICLE WARRANTIES ACT

(Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 407.560–.579)

14. Plaintiff realleges Paragraphs 1–13 as if fully set forth herein.

15. Plaintiff is a “consumer,” Manufacturer is a “manufacturer,” and the Vehicle is a “new motor vehicle” as those terms are defined under § 407.560, RSMo.

16. The Defects constitute one or more Nonconformities that manifested within the earlier of the Express Warranty period or one year from delivery.

17. Manufacturer was afforded a Reasonable Number of Attempts but failed to conform the Vehicle to the Express Warranty.

18. Under § 407.567(2), RSMo, Plaintiff is entitled to replacement of the Vehicle with a comparable new vehicle or, at Plaintiff’s election, a full refund of the purchase price less an offset of $0.10 per mile for use prior to the First Repair Attempt Date, plus collateral charges and statutory interest.

19. Pursuant to § 407.579, RSMo, Plaintiff is also entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and court costs.

COUNT 2 – BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY

(Mo. Rev. Stat. § 400.2-313)

20. Plaintiff realleges Paragraphs 1–19.

21. Manufacturer’s Express Warranty constituted affirmations of fact and promises that became part of the basis of the bargain, creating express warranties under § 400.2-313, RSMo.

22. The Vehicle failed to conform to the Express Warranty, and Manufacturer failed to cure the breach within a reasonable time.

23. As a direct and proximate result of Manufacturer’s breach, Plaintiff suffered damages in an amount equal to the Vehicle’s purchase price, incidental and consequential damages, attorneys’ fees, and court costs.

COUNT 3 – VIOLATION OF MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT

(15 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2312)

24. Plaintiff realleges Paragraphs 1–23.

25. The Express Warranty is a “written warranty,” and Plaintiff is a “consumer” within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 2301.

26. Manufacturer breached the written warranty and, despite reasonable opportunity, has failed to remedy the Defects.

27. Under 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d), Plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement of the purchase price or replacement of the Vehicle, together with costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

[// GUIDANCE: Add additional counts (e.g., Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, common-law fraud) where strategic.]

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant as follows:

A. Order Defendant to, at Plaintiff’s election:
 1. Replace the Vehicle with a new, comparable vehicle free of Nonconformities; or
 2. Refund to Plaintiff the full contract price of the Vehicle, including all collateral charges, less the limited statutory offset for usage;

B. Award incidental and consequential damages, including but not limited to alternate transportation, towing, lodging, and lost wages;

C. Award pre- and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;

D. Award reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and costs pursuant to § 407.579, RSMo and 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d);

E. Grant such further legal or equitable relief—including injunctive relief—as the Court deems just and proper, provided that total monetary relief shall not exceed the Vehicle’s value plus statutory enhancements.

VII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Mo. Const. art. I, § 22(a) and Rule 69.01, Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.

VIII. RULE 55.03 CERTIFICATION

Under Rule 55.03, RSMo Rules of Civil Procedure, the undersigned counsel certifies that to the best of counsel’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, this pleading is well-grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, and is not interposed for any improper purpose.

IX. VERIFICATION

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Missouri that the foregoing facts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Date: ___      ________
           [PLAINTIFF NAME]

[// GUIDANCE: Some Missouri circuits require a notarized verification. Confirm local practice.]

X. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the ___ day of ____ 20__, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition was served via [method] upon:

[Opposing Counsel / Registered Agent Information]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Mo. Bar No. [####]
[Law Firm Name]
[Address] | [City], MO [ZIP]
Phone: [--_] | Email: [_]
Counsel for Plaintiff

[// GUIDANCE:

1. Attach all referenced Exhibits (A-E) when filing.
2. Double-check county-specific filing fees, cover sheet requirements, and summons issuance procedures.
3. If arbitration was not undertaken because Manufacturer’s program is non-compliant, be prepared to rebut any motion to compel ADR.
4. The mileage offset formula (§ 407.567(4), RSMo) is 10¢ per mile for use prior to the first repair attempt; update the calculation to reflect current statutory language if amended.
5. Consider adding a punitive damages claim under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act where facts support “evil motive or reckless indifference.”
   ]