Judge Linda S. Marks, Case 2021-01235248 2022-11-07 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Linda S. Marks, Case: 2021-01235248, Date: 2022-11-07 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Production filed by Juan R Sierra and Adriana A. Orozco on 6/15/22

Meet and confer efforts were sufficient pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b)(2).)

Requests at issue:

Request No. 7: The Warranty Policy and Procedure Manual published by YOU and provided to YOUR authorized repair facility(s), within the state of California, from 2019 to the present.

Request No. 10: A copy of the Workshop Manual specifying diagnosis and repair procedures for vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the subject vehicle.

The Lemon Guide recommends that “Any Warranty Policy and Procedure Manual published by defendant and provided to its authorized repair facilities, within the State of California, for the date the subject vehicle was purchased to the present” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.) Moreover, it also recommends that “Documents that evidence any policy and/or procedure used to evaluate customer requests for repurchase pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, from the date of purchase to the present” be discoverable. (Ibid.)

Request No. 16: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning any internal analysis or investigation by YOU or on YOUR behalf regarding the POWERTRAIN DEFECT in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE.

Request No. 17: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning any internal analysis or investigation by YOU or on YOUR behalf regarding the ELECTRICAL DEFECT in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE.

Request No. 18: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning any internal analysis or investigation by YOU or on YOUR behalf regarding the BRAKE DEFECT in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE.

Request No. 25: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning customer complaints, claims, reported failures, and warranty claims related to the POWERTRAIN DEFECT, including but not limited to any databases in YOUR possession with information from dealers, service departments, parts departments, or warranty departments, and all documents concerning YOUR response to each complaint, claim or reported failure.

The Lemon Guide recommends that “Other customers’ complaints similar to the alleged defects claimed by plaintiff, limited to vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.). Consequently, Request No. 25 is limited to the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle.

Request No. 26: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning customer complaints, claims, reported failures, and warranty claims related to the ELECTRICAL DEFECT, including but not limited to any databases in YOUR possession with information from dealers, service departments, parts departments, or warranty departments, and all documents concerning YOUR response to each complaint, claim or reported failure.

See comments to Request No. 25

Request No. 28: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning failure rates of vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE as a result of the POWERTRAIN DEFECT.

The Lemon Guide recommends that “Any internal analysis and/or investigation regarding defects claimed by plaintiff in vehicles for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle.” (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.) The Lemon Guide also recommends that “Other customers’ complaints similar to the alleged defects claimed by plaintiff, limited to vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.)

Request No. 29: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning failure rates of vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE as a result of the ELECTRICAL DEFECT.

See comments to Request No. 28 above.

Request No. 30: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning failure rates of vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE as a result of the BRAKE DEFECT.

See comments to Request No. 28 above.

Request No. 47: All DOCUMENTS that YOU use to evaluate consumers’ requests for repurchases pursuant to the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

The Lemon Guide recommends that “Documents that evidence any policy and/or procedure used to evaluate customer requests for repurchase pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, from the date of purchase to the present” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.)

Requests 82, 83, 85-91.

These must be limited to vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle. The Lemon Guide recommends that “Technical Service Bulletins and/or Recall Notices for vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle, whether mentioned in the repair history of the subject vehicle or not” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 39.) Moreover, the Lemon Guide recommends that “Any internal analysis and/or investigation regarding defects claimed by plaintiff in vehicles for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle” be discoverable. (See Lemon Guide, § 10.3, p. 38.)

Tentative Ruling:

Request Nos. 7, 10, 16, 17, 18, 28-30, and 47 are GRANTED. Request Nos. 25-27, 82, 83, and 85-91 are GRANTED but limited to vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle.

Defendant shall serve supplemental responses with 30 days of the notice of ruling.

No sanctions were requested, and no sanctions are awarded.

Moving party to give notice.