← Records

SINGLETARY v. CARMAX AUTO SUPERSTORES, INC.

E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-06987

Full docket on CourtListener ↗

No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).

Our records for this case (1)

MatterTypePractice areaCourtDateValue
CARMAX AUTO SUPERSTORES, INC.source ↗
filed by LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT P. COCCO PC · Judge Gerald John Pappert · No. 2:26-cv-06987 · 28:1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $190M–$740M ▾
Comparable consumer-fraud rulings split: Cetorelli affirmed CSPA deceptive-practice liability and treble damages, while Citizens of Humanity and Guthrie show labeling/advertising claims often fail at class-cert or merits stage absent uniform reliance proof.
Comparable settlements $190M–$740M median $299.50M · n=10
DiDi Global Inc. $740M · Merck & Co. Inc. a $688M · Western Union $586M
Comparable verdict: Papaya $420M · Vital Pharmaceutical $293M
Key precedent: Cetorelli v. Duell Action Builders — shows deceptive-advertising claims can survive and yield treble damages/fees when misrepresentation is concrete and provable.
Main risk: Class certification denial due to individualized reliance/communication issues, as in Guthrie v. Transamerica.
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2.50M–$200M
No CarMax-specific precedent or settlement data exists; estimate relies on loosely analogous consumer-protection rulings and broad company-size proxies, so figures are highly uncertain. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 9 verdicts
FilingFalse AdvertisingE.D. Pa.2026-09-11$190M–$740M
comparable settlements