Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 24STCV21112, Date: 2025-01-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV21112    Hearing Date: January 16, 2025    Dept: 52

Defendant American Honda Motor Co.’s Demurrer to Complaint

Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. demurs to plaintiff Alisha Erin Smirch’s third cause of action for violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3).  This subdivision requires auto manufacturers to “[m]ake available to authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period.”  (Ibid.)

On demurrer, the court must liberally construe the complaint and make all reasonable inferences in plaintiff’s favor.  (Robertson v. Saadat (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 630, 639.)  “The plaintiff is required to plead only ultimate facts, not evidentiary facts.”  (C. W. Johnson & Sons, Inc. v. Carpenter (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 165, 169.)  “Less particularity is required when it appears that defendant has superior knowledge of the facts, so long as the pleading gives notice of the issues sufficient to enable preparation of a defense.”  (Okun v. Superior Court (1981) 29 Cal.3d 442, 458; accord County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 119, 126.)

Plaintiff alleges sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action for violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3).  The complaint alleges defendant “failed to make available to the privately owned service and repair shops sufficient service literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period.  Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendant AHM's failure to comply with its obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3).”  (¶ 30.) 

Though not specific, these allegations suffice on demurrer.  The complaint alleges the necessary ultimate facts and gives defendant adequate notice of the issues to enable it to defend itself.  One can reasonably infer that defendant has superior knowledge about what parts or literature it made available to service and repair shops.  Similarly, one can reasonably infer that the repair shops’ lack of parts or literature contributed to their inability to repair plaintiff’s vehicle, thereby damaging her.

Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.’s demurrer is overruled.  Defendant shall answer the complaint within 15 days.