I would think that somewhere in the mountains of case law or in the tort books that a warranty period is tolled if there is substantial litigation that drags on interminably. It would be unconscionable if warranties can expire on affected parties because underlying litigation that would result in warranty claims is not settled or decided until after expiration.
I have every reason to believe swegman's comments about the litigation process and the reputation of the firm that represents Tesla. What troubles me is the fact that if this firm never stipulates to anything, that this firm will not play by the rules of evidence and civil procedure, either. They can obfuscate, delay, deny, lie, and do whatever in their zealous representation without any adverse consequences. If this situation ever gets to discovery, I have no confidence that interrogatory answers and depositions will be truthful. I have no confidence that damning evidence will ever see the light of day.
I guess this firm believes in the old baseball adage, "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'." I can see that swegman fancies this as a jousting match of wits, strategy, and argument, because he is intimately involved in the legal profession, and clearly he/she enjoys the experience. Meanwhile, the rest of us suckers just suffer while the legal drama plays out.
There is just something inherently wrong with the rules of the game. British Parliament abolished the remedy of deodands around 1850, and it only took them 700 years. Maybe it is time to revisit our contemporary procedural, evidentiary, and ethical rules too, but let's not dally for another seven centuries. We're in the 21st Century, and life and all its uncertainties have changed since the days of powdered wigs.
