Mamikon Karapetian v. Kia Motors America, Inc.

Good Law
539 F. App'x 814
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 3, 201310-56917California781 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Mamikon Karapetian appeals the district court’s partial grant of his motion for attorneys’ fees and costs as the prevailing party under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Cal. Civ.Code. § 1790 et seq., after the parties settled Karapetian’s claims against the defendant, Kia Motors America (“KMA”).

KMA argues that we do not have jurisdiction over Karapetian’s appeal because, after the district court’s ruling on his motion for attorneys’ fees, Karapetian and KMA jointly stipulated to dismissal of the action with prejudice, which the district court granted. It is well-established that a plaintiff cannot “appeal from a joint stipulation to voluntary dismissal, entered unconditionally by the court pursuant to a settlement agreement.” Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1507 (9th Cir.1995); see also Seidman v. City of Beverly Hills, 785 F.2d 1447, 1448 (9th Cir.1986). Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to review the order dismissing the action pursuant to the parties’ joint stipulation.

However, Karapetian’s notice of appeal also designates the district court’s order granting in part his motion for attorneys’ fees. The district court granted Karape-tian…

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.