77 Cal.App.5th 209
Cal. Ct. App.2022Background
- In 2013 plaintiffs bought a 2011 Dodge Ram 2500 from a third‑party used dealer; the truck had >55,000 miles and the basic (bumper‑to‑bumper) warranty had expired but the limited powertrain warranty remained in effect.
- The truck experienced recurring electrical defects in the Totally Integrated Power Module (TIPM) and underwent multiple repair visits at an authorized Chrysler dealer without permanent resolution.
- In 2018 plaintiffs sued FCA under the Song‑Beverly Consumer Warranty Act §1793.2(d)(2) (the Lemon Law) seeking the refund‑or‑replace remedy.
- FCA moved for summary judgment, arguing the truck was not a “new motor vehicle” under §1793.22(e)(2) because it was previously sold by an unaffiliated reseller and no manufacturer warranty was issued at the time of that sale.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for FCA. The Court of Appeal considered whether the phrase “other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer’s new car warranty” covers previously owned vehicles that merely retain some remaining manufacturer warranty. The court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether “other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer’s new car warranty” in §1793.22(e)(2) includes previously owned cars sold by third‑party resellers that retain some remaining original manufacturer warranty | The phrase covers any vehicle sold with a manufacturer’s warranty still in force, so plaintiffs’ used truck (with remaining powertrain warranty) qualifies as a “new motor vehicle” entitled to refund‑or‑replace relief | The phrase refers to dealer‑owned cars, demonstrators, or other vehicles that are essentially new and sold with a full new‑car warranty issued at the time of sale; it does not include used cars resold by unaffiliated dealers merely because an original warranty survives | The phrase is a catchall for vehicles sold as basically new with a new‑car warranty (e.g., demonstrators, dealer‑owned units); it does not cover previously sold vehicles that only happen to have remaining warranty time. Summary judgment for FCA affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kirzhner v. Mercedes‑Benz USA, LLC, 9 Cal.5th 966 (2020) (statutory interpretation: examine language in full statutory context).
- Jensen v. BMW of N. Am., Inc., 35 Cal.App.4th 112 (1995) (addressed demonstrator/lease with manufacturer warranty; often cited for scope of "sold with" language).
- Kiluk v. Mercedes‑Benz USA, LLC, 43 Cal.App.5th 334 (2019) (criticized overly broad reading that would treat any vehicle with remaining warranty as "new motor vehicle").
- Johnson v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., 272 F.Supp.3d 1168 (N.D. Cal. 2017) (federal decision holding a third‑party used purchase with no new warranty issued at sale is not a "new motor vehicle").
- Dagher v. Ford Motor Co., 238 Cal.App.4th 905 (2015) (limits Jensen’s reasoning; emphasizes facts matter when construing "sold with" language).
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 25 Cal.4th 826 (2001) (summary judgment standard and burden of proof on a moving party).