Medina

Medina v. St. George Auto Sales, Inc.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2024G063909California5,363 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moore, J.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I.

MEDINA BUYS THE CAR

St. George sells used cars. In September 2014, it obtained a Chrysler 300 (defined above as, the car) at an auction with the intent to resell it. After the auction, its mechanics discovered the car had engine problems. Since the car was still under the manufacturer’s warranty, St. George sent it to a Chrysler dealership in Ontario (Chrysler Ontario) where it underwent engine repairs for nearly two months. Medina purchased the car from St. George near the end of December 2014. Alaska Federal financed the purchase. Prior to the purchase, St. George represented to Medina that the car’s engine was properly functioning. It also represented that the car “was in good condition,” and that St. George “[sold] nothing but quality vehicles.” At no point during the sale did St. George disclose to Medina that the car had undergone nearly two months of engine work. On Medina’s drive home from the dealership after the purchase, the car’s check engine light activated. Medina called the salesperson, and

3 asked, “what’s going on? You told me everything was going to be in good condition. And here I am driving home, and the check engine light is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.