Reveles

Reveles v. Toyota by the Bay

Bad Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 751·57 Cal. App. 4th 1139·67 Cal. Rptr. 2d 543·97 Daily Journal DAR 12154·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7564
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 1997D027302California6,147 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

Toyota by the Bay (Toyota) sold an irreparably damaged and hazardous used truck to Victor E. Reveles and then refused to refund his money or provide a replacement when it became inoperable within two months. In spite of clear evidence of liability, Toyota stonewalled all possibility of settlement, forcing Reveles to bring suit and engage in year-long discovery efforts, retain expert witnesses, file trial memoranda and prepare jury instructions. Only on the day of trial did Toyota finally agree to pay Reveles the amount for which he had offered to settle the case a year earlier. Because Reveles had unnecessarily incurred substantial litigation expenses in preparing for jury trial, he refused to forgo trial unless Toyota stipulated the court retain jurisdiction to determine whether he was the “prevailing party” and entitled to attorney fees and other costs. Toyota did so, but after judgment attempted to renege.

On appeal, Toyota argues that notwithstanding its stipulation, the court lacked jurisdiction to determine Reveles was a “prevailing party” where judgment was entered by agreement, rather than after trial. We conclude Toyota waived the argument and, in any event, 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.