Carranza

Carranza v. Mass Automotive Group CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 20, 2025B339578California963 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kim, J.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Luis Carranza Jr., a self-represented litigant, appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant Mass Automotive Group, LLC dba Nissan of Mission Hills. The complaint Carranza filed is not in the appellate record he designated. From his appellate brief and other documents in the record, we gather that this action concerns his purchase of a vehicle from Nissan of Mission Hills. We cannot provide a statement of the facts because the limited record does not include documents describing the facts and circumstances of the vehicle purchase. As to the procedural history of the case, the record shows that on December 28, 2022, the trial court granted Nissan of Mission Hills’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the case pending completion of the arbitration. The appellate record, however, does not include the motion to compel arbitration, the alleged vehicle sales contract, or any arbitration agreement. Carranza’s opposition to the motion, which is in the record before us, states that the sales contract presented by Nissan of Mission Hills was “fraudulent” and could not “be used” to compel arbitration. According to the trial court’s case register, which 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.