Lemon Law
Share
Ivar v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (Sept. 26, 2023, E078783) 2023 WL 6224689
Court of Appeal reverses order denying settlement enforcement and interprets settlement under CCP 998 in favor of GMSR’s clients
GMSR secures another Court of Appeal win holding that manufacturers cannot offset their Song-Beverly Act damages by amounts the plaintiff receives for trading in a “lemon” vehicle
The Song-Beverly Act requires car manufacturers to promptly buy back defective cars without the consumer having to sue. Consumer advocates have long argued that manufacturers may not offset damages for amounts that plaintiffs are credited when they sell or trade in a defective car under
Williams v. FCA US LLC (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th 44
GMSR secures another Court of Appeal win holding that manufacturers cannot offset their Song-Beverly Act damages by amounts the plaintiff receives for trading in a “lemon” vehicle
GMSR secures split in authority before the California Supreme Court weighs in: Court of Appeal agrees with GMSR that manufacturers are not entitled to offsets for a car consumer’s resale of a “lemon”
The Song-Beverly Act requires car manufacturers to promptly buy back defective cars without the consumer having to sue. Consumer advocates have long argued that manufacturers may not offset damages for amounts that plaintiffs are credited when they sell or trade in a defective car under
Figueroa v. FCA US, LLC (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 708
GMSR secures split in authority before the California Supreme Court weighs in: Court of Appeal agrees with GMSR that manufacturers are not entitled to offsets for a car consumer’s resale of a “lemon”
Dhital v. Nissan North America, Inc. (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 828
GMSR secures reinstatement of client’s fraudulent inducement claims
Riley v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (9th Cir. 2022) 51 F.4th 896
“Reprehensible” diesel scam by car manufacturer merits damages boost, holds the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Judgment Reversed: The Ninth Circuit Rules That GMSR’s Clients Did Not Abandon A Favorable Jury Verdict Merely By Arguing That Post-Judgment Proceedings Were Unnecessary
GMSR’s clients, two retirees who unwittingly leased a defective car, secured favorable jury verdicts on two claims under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act: one for breach of express warranty and another for breach of implied warranty. Recognizing that they were not entitled to a double
Quintero v. Ford Motor Company (9th Cir. July 21, 2022, No. 20-55883) 2022 WL 2869771
The Ninth Circuit rules that GMSR’s clients did not abandon a favorable jury verdict merely by arguing that post-judgment proceedings were unnecessary
Review Granted: The California Supreme Court Will Decide What Protections The Song-Beverly Act Affords To Buyers of Previously-Owned Cars Like GMSR’s Clients
Consumers purchased a two-year old car that—while still under warranty—had proven to be a lemon: The car’s engine didn’t work properly and the manufacturer couldn’t fix it. So, the consumers sued the manufacturer under the Song-Beverly Act for a refund or a replacement. Both the
Who We Serve
Whether on appeal, assisting trial counsel, or advising government officials contemplating legislative action, GMSR provides unique insight into the complex laws that impact public entities.
Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.
GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.
The firm’s lawyers are team players, collaborating with trial counsel at any level from legal strategy to writing or editing trial court motions and appellate briefs.
GMSR vigorously advocates the rights of individual plaintiffs and defendants, in both state and federal appellate courts.
As part of GMSR’s long-standing commitment to social justice and equality, GMSR provides pro bono appellate services to individuals and to community organizations on issues of concern.
© 2024 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Los Angeles
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
San Francisco
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.