Kim

Kim v. EUROMOTORS WEST/THE AUTO GALLERY

Good Law
149 Cal. App. 4th 170·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 483·2007 Daily Journal DAR 4373·56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 780·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3486
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 2, 2007B189277California4,215 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

This appeal arises out of an action brought by plaintiff and appellant Richard Sang Kim against defendant and respondent Euromotors West/The. Auto Gallery (TAG) for, among other things, violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.; CLRA). Kim appeals from the January 10, 2006, order denying his motion for attorney fees following entry of a stipulated judgment pursuant to a settlement agreement. Kim contends the trial court erred in finding that, because the matter was resolved by settlement agreement prior to trial, there could be no prevailing party. We reverse and remand with instructions.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The complaint alleges that, on September 8, 2003, Kim traded in his 2001 Porsche Boxster to lease a used 2001 Porsche 996 Turbo (the vehicle) from TAG. According to the lease.agreement, the “gross capitalized cost” of the vehicle at lease signing was $88,366.51 and the total amount Kim would have to pay on the lease by the end of the 48-month lease term would be $66,844. In addition, the estimated amount Kim, would have to pay for official fees and taxes was $4,533.38. Along with the lease, Kim received a written…

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.