California Court of Appeal

In this class action against defendant automobile dealership, alleging numerous causes of action including unfair competition and deceptive business practices, judgment in favor of defendant is: 1) reversed with respect to plaintiffs' backdating claims, where backdating could have resulted in inaccurate disclosures to class members; 2) affirmed with respect to plaintiffs' smog fee claims; 3) affirmed in part, where plaintiffs did not meet their burden of proving a violation of the Automobile Sales Finance Act (ASFA); and 4) reversed with respect to claims under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) brought by plaintiff Salcedo, where the judgment in his favor on his fraud claim should have resulted in a judgment in his favor on his UCL and CLRA claims.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/16/2014
• Published 09/16/2014

Judges

• Hollenhorst

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel