American Honda Motor Co. v. Superior Court

Good Law
132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 91·199 Cal. App. 4th 1367·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1310
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2011No. B229687California5,225 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bigelow, J.

In this mandate proceeding, American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (Honda), challenges the trial court’s order certifying a class of individuals who purchased or leased Acura cars with a defective third gear. Because the trial court relied upon an erroneous legal assumption when it made its ruling and there is insufficient community of interest here to sustain the class that was certified, we conclude the trial court’s certification order was an abuse of discretion, for which mandate is an appropriate remedy.

FACTS

Plaintiff Jin Hyeong Lee bought a new Acura RSX with a six-speed manual transmission on October 13, 2006. The car came with a standard manufacturer’s four-year, 50,000-mile warranty, which certified that “Acura will repair or replace any part that is defective in material or workmanship under normal use.” Lee began to experience problems with the transmission within the warranty period when the car would “pop out” of third gear while it was running. Lee took the car to be serviced on this issue four times within 15 months, but was told by Honda technicians that the car was operating as designed and that there was no nonconformity or defect.

In January 2007, Honda…

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.