Johnson v. Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc.

Good Law
578 F. Supp. 2d 1229·2008 WL 4346787·67 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 573·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74873
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 2008Case SACV 07-00931-CJC(RNBx)California5,461 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carney, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America (“MDEA”) moves for summary judgment on the claims alleged by Plaintiff Kelly Johnson for breach of express warranty, fraudulent concealment, violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17200, and unjust enrichment. Mr. Johnson’s claims all arise from his $3103.99 purchase of an MDEA television set from the New Jersey electronics store Camera Stop on November 6, 2005. Mr. Johnson’s purchase of the television was based primarily on a conversation with a salesman at Camera Stop. He asked the salesperson at Camera Stop to recommend the best “1080p” television set on the market, and the salesperson pointed Mr. Johnson to the MDEA television. His sole contact with MDEA consisted of one visit to the MDEA Web site to check the television’s price and confirm that it was 1080p.

Mr. Johnson wanted to buy a state-of-the-art television and was apparently willing to spend more than $3,000 to get it. He knew that 1080p was the industry’s marketing buzzword and allowed that to define his purchasing decision, despite not knowing what 1080p meant. Even after his…

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.