Johnson v. Forest River RV CA4/1
D085014
Cal. Ct. App.Aug 22, 2025Background
- Johnson purchased a Forest River trailer in California and alleged it was defective, filing suit under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Song-Beverly Act) in California.
- The warranty form included a forum selection clause requiring warranty-related claims to be filed in Indiana courts and decided under Indiana law.
- Forest River and Beaumont RV, the defendants, moved to stay the California action based on this clause, but offered to stipulate that California law would apply if the case were heard in Indiana, acknowledging the Song-Beverly Act's unwaivable rights.
- The trial court granted the stay, reasoning the defendants’ stipulation cured any public policy issue.
- Johnson appealed, arguing enforcement would violate California public policy protecting consumer warranty rights.
- After the trial court's decision, new appellate decisions clarified the law on stipulations to apply California law in foreign forums.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of forum selection clause selecting Indiana | Violates public policy and unwaivable Song-Beverly Act rights | Stipulation to apply California law in Indiana cures public policy concerns | Stipulation does not cure; enforcing clause would violate California public policy |
| Severance of invalid choice-of-law provision | Post-dispute offer to stipulate does not make clause enforceable | Invalid provision can be severed; forum clause stands with stipulation | Unilateral stipulation is not proper severance; cannot simply rewrite the contract |
| Allowing stay subject to later lift if Indiana court defaults | Court procedure is unworkable and does not protect consumer rights | Stay is proper since case can return to California if Indiana court misapplies law | Allowing for later review does not solve public policy problem |
| Use of dicta in prior cases (Verdugo) | Prior dicta is not controlling | Prior cases suggest stipulation to apply CA law is possible | Follows more recent published holdings; prior dicta not controlling |
Key Cases Cited
- Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc., 16 Cal.5th 478 (2024) (explains severance of unconscionable terms and deterrent effects)
- Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Servs., Inc., 24 Cal.4th 83 (2000) (sets rules for severability and augmentation of unconscionable contract provisions)
- Verdugo v. Alliantgroup, L.P., 237 Cal.App.4th 141 (2015) (discusses enforceability of forum selection clauses in light of unwaivable statutory rights)
- America Online, Inc. v. Superior Court, 90 Cal.App.4th 1 (2001) (rejects lifting a stay procedure as a remedy to unwaivable right concerns)