Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 24STCV34467, Date: 2025-06-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV34467    Hearing Date: June 13, 2025    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

            Background

            This is a Song-Beverly Act (lemon law) action arising out of the purchase of a 2022 Ram 1500, VIN 1C6SRFJTXNN163430 (“Subject Vehicle”). On December 30, 2024, Plaintiff Mee Chi (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against Defendants FCA US, LLC (“FCA”), Santa Cruz Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram (“Dodge”) (collectively, “Defendants”), and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive for: (1) Violation of Subdivision (d) of Civil Code Section 1793.2; (2) Violation of Subdivision (b) of Civil Code Section 1793.2; (3) Violation of Subdivision (a)(3) of Civil Code Section 1793.2; (4) Breach of the Implied Warranty of Merchantability; (5) Negligent Repair; and (6) Fraudulent Inducement – Concealment.

            On February 7, 2025, Dodge filed an Answer to Complaint. The same day, FCA filed a Declaration of Demurring Party Regarding Meet and Confer.

            FCA now demurs to the sixth cause of action for Fraudulent Inducement – Concealment. Plaintiff filed an Opposition on June 2, 2025. FCA filed a Reply on June 4, 2025.

            Discussion

As a preliminary matter, Defendant FCA US, LLC’s (“FCA”) counsel of record, Matthew M. Proudfoot filed a declaration in support of the present demurrer, which indicates, inter alia, that “On February 4, 2025, in compliance with Cal. Code of Civ. Pro., § 430.41, our office sent a letter to Plaintiff’s counsel’s office informing them of the specific issues raised in the demurrer. Defendant was also amendable to an extension if necessary.” (Proudfoot Decl., ¶3, Ex. A.) Furthermore, FCA’s counsel stated, inter alia, that “Plaintiff did not respond to Defendants’ meet and confer letter.” (Id. at ¶4.)

However, the declaration does not demonstrate the parties met and conferred via telephone or in-person, or that FCA’s counsel attempted to call Plaintiff’s counsel and/or to meet in-person.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a), “[b]efore filing a demurrer pursuant to this chapter, the demurring party shall meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by video conference with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to demurrer for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer.” (Emphasis added.) Meet and confer efforts must be done in good faith to try to resolve the issues subject to the demurrer informally.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the hearing on Defendant FCA US, LLC’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint is CONTINUED to _______________________ _____, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. in Dept. 50.

Defendant FCA US, LLC is ordered to meet and confer with Plaintiff Mee Chi within ten  days of the date of this order. If the parties are unable to resolve the pleading issues¿or if the parties are otherwise unable to meet and confer in good faith, FCA is to¿thereafter¿file and serve¿a declaration setting forth the efforts to meet and confer in compliance with¿Code of Civil Procedure Section 430.41, subdivision (a)(3) within fifteen days of this order.¿

Additionally, the parties are required to deliver courtesy copies of the motion, opposition and reply to Dept. 50.  See Courtroom Information for Dept. 50 on the Court’s website. Courtesy copies of the briefs will be due 5 court days prior to the hearing.

Defendant  is ordered to provide notice of this ruling.

DATED:  June 13, 2025                                

________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court