Product Liability Update

Section 998’s Cost-Shifting Provisions May Apply When Case Ends in Settlement

By Chariese Solorio, Sarah M. Nakamoto, and Kina Wong* A divided court in Madrigal v. Hyundai Motor America (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 385, as modified on denial of reh’g (May 9, 2023), review filed (June 20, 2023) recently held that the cost-shifting penalty provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 998 apply when a case […]

| 6 min read
CS
SN

Component-Part Manufacturers Are Not Required to Indemnify Retail Sellers Under California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act Unless Express Warranty Is Provided

By Chariese Solorio, Sarah M. Nakamoto, and Anthony Pimentel* The California Court of Appeal in Mega RV Corp. v. HWH Corp. (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 1318 held that component-part manufacturers are not obligated to indemnify retail sellers under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1792 of the California Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the “Act”) unless they […]

| 3 min read
CS
SN

Purchasers of Vehicles from Private Party Sellers Have No Standing Under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act

By Chariese Solorio, Sarah M. Nakamoto, and Madeline Ward* In Dagher v. Ford Motor Co. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 905, the plaintiff purchased a used vehicle in a private sale from the original purchaser. The vehicle had over 12,500 miles and two years left on its five-year express manufacturer’s warranty. Id. at 912. After the purchase, […]

| 2 min read
CS
SN

California Supreme Court Clarifies Possible Lemon Law Damages

By Chariese Solorio, Sarah M. Nakamoto, and Olivia LaCasto* In Kirzhner v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (2020) 9 Cal.5th 966, the California Supreme Court expanded the possible damages that are recoverable under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the “Act”) to include registration renewal and nonoperation fees as incidental damages if such fees were “incurred after the […]

| 3 min read
CS
SN

California Supreme Court Limits Consumer Lemon Law Protection to Vehicles Purchased in California

By Sarah M. Nakamoto, Chariese Solorio, and Paige Sorensen* In Cummins, Inc. v. Superior Court (2005) 36 Cal.4th 478, 483, the California Supreme Court addressed the issue of “whether a buyer who resides in California may bring suit against a manufacturer under the [Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty] Act when the buyer purchased the vehicle in another […]

| 4 min read
SN
CS

Service Contracts Are Not Express Warranties Under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act

In Gavaldon v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2004) 32 Cal. 4th 1246, the California Supreme Court found that service contracts are not express warranties under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the Act did not otherwise authorize replacement or restitution as a remedy for breaches of service contracts. The Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civil Code section 1791 […]

| 3 min read
SN

Collateral Source Rule Not Violated by References to Medical Insurance, Medicare and Social Security

Stokes v. Muschinske, No. B280116, 2019 WL 1513208 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 2019) (awaiting official publication) begs the question, does reference to a plaintiff’s membership in a health care plan, like Kaiser Permanente, or Medicare eligibility violate the collateral source rule?  The California Court of Appeal says not necessarily. In Stokes, the defendant was […]

| 4 min read
SN
DH