Padilla

Padilla v. Moore CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 22, 2015E059794California1,961 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On or about October 25, 2009, Padilla filled out a credit application at Metro that

showed gross monthly income of $8,375, and a monthly mortgage payment of $2,175.

On or about October 26, 2009, Padilla executed a Retail Installment Sale Contract

(contract) for the purchase of a 2009 Nissan Murano from Metro. Metro prepared the

contract, identifying Padilla as the sole buyer. Padilla understood that “[w]henever you

sign as a cosigner, you’re always responsible, no matter what.” Moore was Metro’s

salesman who presented the contract to Padilla for signature.

By signing the contract, Padilla was helping her friend and coworker, Deandra

Stroud, purchase a vehicle “along with me, both, the two of us.” Padilla agreed to be a

cosigner. The plan involved Stroud giving Padilla the money each month to make the

payment. However, on or about November 1, 2011, when Stroud stopped giving Padilla

the money, Padilla went to Stroud’s house, picked up the Murano, and returned it to the

dealership.

On March 6, 2012, Padilla initiated this action against defendants, asserting causes

of action for fraud and declaratory relief—rescission. Padilla…

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.