Hamidi

Hamidi v. Manheim Investments CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 2025G063853California4,467 words

Opinion

Opinion

facts sufficient to overcome the waiver. We conclude that Hamidi has failed to produce evidence to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact as to gross negligence, and therefore we affirm the judgment.

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1

Manheim owns and operates automobile auctions at which wholesale dealers purchase new and used automobiles. Hamidi is an automobile dealer. Dealers are prohibited from entering Manheim’s premises to attend an automobile auction without first electronically signing Manheim’s Terms and Conditions that are in effect at the time. On June 15, 2018, Hamidi electronically signed Manheim’s June 1, 2018 Terms and

1 The appellant’s appendix Hamidi filed in this case is

disorganized. The documents are included in an order that follows no discernible rhyme or reason, which makes relevant documents more difficult to locate. The documents, referred to as “exhibits,” jump from the complaint to the motion for summary judgment to various documents that might have been attached to a motion. We are not sure. The judgment is in the middle of the appendix. Various declarations are scattered throughout. Overall, this lack of organization has made…

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.