Hardin Oldsmobile v. New Motor Vehicle Bd.

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 67·52 Cal. App. 4th 585·60 Cal. Rptr. 2d 583·97 Daily Journal DAR 1133·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 805
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 31, 1997C022987California4,988 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

The jurisdiction of the New Motor Vehicle Board (Board) has limits. The claims asserted by the plaintiff, Hardin Oldsmobile (Hardin), are not within those limits. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s contrary finding and remand for the court to issue a writ prohibiting the Board from exercising jurisdiction over Hardin’s claims.

Facts and Procedural History

This litigation arises from Hardin’s allegations of misdealing by Honda. Hardin claims Honda’s executives received bribes and kickbacks in exchange for favors concerning the allocation of new cars and the location and ownership of new dealerships. Hardin asserts it did not receive a rightful allocation of the most salable cars and was not properly considered for new dealerships because it did not participate in the misconduct.

Hardin filed a civil action against Honda and other defendants in the federal district court for the central district of California, alleging causes of action for various federal statutory violations, including racketeering allegations, several California statutory violations, and five common law contract and tort claims and seeking compensatory, treble, and punitive damages.

The…

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.