Lilit Tadevosyan v. Kia America Inc.
2:24-cv-11232
C.D. Cal.May 16, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Lilit Tadevosyan leased a new 2024 Kia EV6 and alleged multiple defects began appearing within three months.
- She sought repairs through authorized facilities, but issues persisted.
- Tadevosyan filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court alleging claims under federal and state warranty laws, fraud, negligence, and statutory consumer protection violations.
- Defendants removed the action to federal court, asserting federal question jurisdiction under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA).
- Tadevosyan moved to remand the case to state court, arguing the amount in controversy did not meet the MMWA's $50,000 requirement.
- The Court denied her motion to remand, determining the amount in controversy threshold was satisfied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the amount in controversy meet the $50,000 requirement under the MMWA? | Tadevosyan argues her actual damages are only $17,415.44 and the $82,370.23 damages listed included all penalties and costs, thus not meeting the threshold. | Defendants argue the Prayer for Relief seeks $82,370.23 in damages and civil penalties, thus amount in controversy is satisfied. | The Court agreed with Defendants; actual damages and potential civil penalties exceeded $50,000. |
| Should the court consider potential civil penalties in calculating the amount in controversy? | Tadevosyan requested exclusion of civil penalties in calculation. | Defendants asserted civil penalties should be included. | The Court found civil penalties under Song-Beverly Act are properly part of the amount in controversy. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gibson v. Chrysler Corp., 261 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2001) (punitive damages are properly included in the amount in controversy assessment)
- Brady v. Mercedes-Benz USA, Inc., 243 F. Supp. 2d 1004 (N.D. Cal. 2002) (Song-Beverly Act civil penalties akin to punitive damages, included for amount in controversy)
- Korn v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp., 536 F. Supp. 2d 1199 (E.D. Cal. 2008) (measurement of amount in controversy relies on allegations in the complaint)