Sharma

Sharma v. Toyota Motor Sales USA CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 2022E074382California1,188 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

After experiencing problems with her car’s battery, Sharma sued the manufacturer

and dealer under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, asserting a breach of

express warranty claim against the manufacturer and breach of the implied warranty of

merchantability claims against the manufacturer and the dealer. At trial, defendants

presented evidence the Sienna was merchantable and conformed to express warranties

when Sharma purchased it and that the battery problems developed only after she

installed an aftermarket video surveillance system. On July 25, 2019, the jury returned

defense verdicts on all three claims.

The trial court entered judgment on August 27, 2019, and defendants served

Sharma with the notice of entry of judgment on September 5, 2019. About two weeks

later, on September 20, 2019, Sharma filed a notice of intent to move for a new trial.

On September 24, 2019, the trial judge, Riverside Superior Court Judge Ronald

Taylor, notified the parties that he’d set the hearing on Sharma’s motion for October 18,

2019. Sharma failed to appear at the October 18 hearing, and the judge issued an order

2 taking the motion off calendar due to Sharma’s failure to…

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.