Aletha Nelson v. Thor Motor Coach, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
I. Background
A. Facts The following facts are drawn from Plaintiff’s Complaint (“Compl.”) (Dkt. 1-1). This action concerns Plaintiff’s purchase of a vehicle manufactured by Defendant Thor Motor Company (“TMC”). Compl. ¶ 7–10. Plaintiff alleges that the vehicle contained or developed numerous defects and continued to exhibit such defects after Plaintiff returned the vehicle to the authorized repair facility for repairs. Id. ¶ 12. Plaintiff alleges that TMC has continuously failed to make the vehicle conform to the applicable warranties. Id. ¶ 13. Plaintiff brings claims under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act seeking
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. SA CV 20-01266-DOC-KES Date: September 11, 2020 Page
actual damages, civil penalties, costs and expenses, attorneys’ fees, recision of the contract and restitution of consideration, and prejudgment interest. Id. at 5.
B. Procedural History Plaintiff originally filed suit in the Superior Court of California, County of Orange. Dkt. 1. Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Remand (Dkt. 10) on August 11, 2020. On August 24, 2020, Defendant filed an Opposition (“Opp’n”) (Dkt. 12).