Vicente Rodriguez vs. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., a California Corporation

Case Background

On April 05, 2021, Vicente Rodriguez filed a lawsuit against American Honda Motor Co. Inc. alleging breach of warranty and violation of the Song-Beverly Act. The case was filed before the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. Judge Holly J. Fujie and Michael P. Linfield presided over this case. [Case number: 21STCV12885]

Cause

Vicente Rodriguez, the Plaintiff, resided in Burbank, Los Angeles County, California. The Defendant, American Honda Motor (AHM), was a California corporation registered to operate in the state, with its registered office in Los Angeles.
On November 27, 2019, Vicente entered into a warranty contract with American Honda for a 2019 Honda Civic, referred to as “the Subject Vehicle.”

Defects and nonconformities appeared within the warranty period, affecting areas such as the suspension and interior. These nonconformities significantly impaired the vehicle’s use, value, and safety. Vicente took the Subject Vehicle to an authorized American Honda repair facility for repairs. The Subject Vehicle was unsuitable for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are typically used. Furthermore, it failed to meet the promises or representations made on its container or label. The vehicle did not match the quality generally accepted in the trade.

Despite several attempts, Defendant could not bring the Subject Vehicle into compliance with the express warranty. According to the Song-Beverly Act, Defendant had a duty to promptly offer a repurchase or replacement when the vehicle failed to conform to warranty terms after reasonable repair attempts.

However, American Honda did not replace the Subject Vehicle or provide restitution as required by the Song-Beverly Act. This failure to conform to the express warranty or to issue timely restitution constituted a violation of the Act.

Damages

Under the Song-Beverly Act, the Plaintiff was entitled to reimbursement for the price paid for the vehicle, minus any amount attributable to his use before he first presented it to an authorized repair facility for nonconformity. Additionally, the Plaintiff was entitled to all incidental, consequential, and general damages resulting from the Defendant’s failure to meet its obligations under the Act.

The Plaintiff could also recover, as part of the judgment, a sum equal to the total costs and expenses incurred, including attorney’s fees, related to initiating and pursuing this action. Furthermore, Plaintiff was entitled to a civil penalty of up to twice the amount of actual damages due to American Honda’s willful failure to comply with its responsibilities under the Song-Beverly Act.

The Plaintiff sought both replacement or reimbursement under Civil Code section 1794, et seq., and rescission of the contract. Additionally, he was entitled to recover “cover” damages. Furthermore, they were entitled to recover all incidental and consequential damages under the Civil Code and the Commercial Code.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Vicente Rodriguez
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Steve B. Mikov | Amy Morse
  • Defendant(s): American Honda Motor Co. Inc.
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Trang T. Tran | Adjoa M. Anim-Appiah | Linda R. Echegaray

Claims

Plaintiff argued that Defendant AHM had violated the Song-Beverly Act by breaching the express and implied warranty.

Defense

AHM denied all allegations in the complaint. AHM also specifically denied that Plaintiff suffered any damages due to any actions or omissions by AHM or its employees. The vehicle was not defective or unmerchantable when it left AHM’s possession, custody, and control. Any damage to the vehicle resulted from changes made after its manufacture or sale by individuals other than AHM or its employees, preventing Plaintiff from recovering damages.

AHM believed that any alleged breach of warranty regarding fitness or merchantability, if it existed, did not cause Plaintiff’s damages. Similarly, any breach of AHM’s contractual obligations, if it occurred, was neither the cause nor the proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. Instead, AHM contended that these alleged breaches were only secondary and inconsequential. They did not contribute to or cause the damages claimed by Plaintiff in any meaningful way.

Jury Verdict

On February 08, 2024, the LA jury returned a defense verdict after it determined that the 2019 Honda Civic did not have a defect covered by the written warranty that substantially impaired the vehicle’s use, value, or safety to a reasonable buyer in Vicente Rodriguez’s situation. Thus, no breach of warranty had taken place.

Accordingly, on February 22, 2024, Hon. Holly J. Fujie passed a judgment declaring that Plaintiff Vicente Rodriguez shall recover nothing from Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

Court Documents:

Available upon request