Irma L. Anderson v. FCA US LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJuly 6, 20212:21-cv-03125California2,607 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

I. Background

A. Factual Background This dispute relates to Plaintiff’s purchase of an allegedly defective Chrysler 300 vehicle (the “Vehicle”). See generally Complaint, Dkt. # 1-2 (“Compl.”).

On or about May 10, 2012, Plaintiff purchased the Vehicle from Defendant Cerritos Dodge, Inc. d/b/a Cerritos Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram (“Cerritos Dodge”).2 See id. ¶ 7. Defendant FCA manufactured and distributed the Vehicle that Plaintiff purchased. See id.

The Vehicle was covered by an express warranty. See id. ¶ 8. The warranty stated that FCA would maintain or provide compensation for the failure of the Vehicle’s performance or 1 The Court cites Plaintiff’s memorandum in support of her motion because it contains her substantive arguments. Plaintiff’s motion, itself, is Docket Entry # 18. 2 Plaintiff erroneously sued Cerritos Dodge as Cerritos Dodge Chrysler Jeep. See February 27,

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV 21-3125 PSG (JPRx) Date July 6, 2021 Title Irma L. Anderson v. FCA US LLC, et al. utility. See id. If a defect developed within the warranty period, FCA further assured Plaintiff that she could deliver the…

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.