571 F. App'x 546
9th Cir.2014Background
- Star Chrysler Jeep appeals district court's grant of summary judgment to Chrysler Group LLC.
- Arbitrator ordered Star to be added to Chrysler’s dealer network; no reinstatement order issued.
- Star challenges LOI terms under § 747(e) as not customary and usual for new dealers.
- District court did not analyze Star's UCL claim premised on § 747; preemption concerns noted with bankruptcy order.
- Protest waivers in Star's LOI were valid under California law; § 11713.3 applicability discussed but unresolved on record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Star is entitled to reinstatement under § 747(e). | Star contends reinstatement is warranted under § 747(e). | Chrysler argues no reinstatement remedy; LOI terms govern. | Affirmed on reinstatement; no reinstatement ordered. |
| Whether Star's LOI satisfies § 747(e)'s customary and usual requirement. | Star's LOI terms are customary and usual; expert supports burdensome terms lack incentives. | Chrysler provided Tangeman declaration; terms deemed customary. | Reversed; triable issues remain regarding customary and usual terms. |
| Whether Chrysler's actions violated California UCL due to § 747.technical relation. | Star argues UCL premised on § 747 violation; seeks relief. | Chrysler complied with bankruptcy plan; state law cannot override. | Vacated as to UCL claim tied to § 747; preemption concerns noted. |
| Whether Chrysler violated California Vehicle Code § 11713.3 by protest waivers in LOI. | Protest waivers are improper under § 11713.3( l ). | Waivers were valid and enforceable under California law at the time. | Affirmed; waivers valid; § 11713.3 inapplicable on record pending further analysis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (Supreme Court 1986) (nonmoving party's burden to show genuine issue of material fact)
- Nissan Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Fritz Cos., 210 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2000) (burden on summary judgment to show basis for motion and genuine issues)
- DaimlerChrysler Motors Co. v. Lew Williams, Inc., 48 Cal. Rptr. 3d 233 (Cal. App. 2006) (valid protest waivers under California law)
- Lusardi v. Stellar, 329 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2003) (bankruptcyStay and state law preemption principles)