Base

Base v. FCA US LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 20193:17-cv-01532California4,519 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6

GLEN R. BASE,

7 Case No. 17-cv-01532-JCS Plaintiff, 8 v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 9 DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR

FCA US LLC, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS AND

10 EXPENSES Defendant. 11 Re: Dkt. No. 99

12 13 I. INTRODUCTION 14 Plaintiff Galen Base filed this action in Sonoma County Superior Court, asserting claims 15 against Defendant FCA U.S. LLC (“FCA”) under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act 16 (“Song-Beverly Act”), Cal. Civ. Code section 1790, et seq. FCA removed the action to this Court 17 on the basis of diversity jurisdiction and the parties eventually entered into a settlement agreement. 18 Plaintiff now brings a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Expenses (“Motion”) as the 19 prevailing party under California Civil Code section 1794(d). A hearing on the Motion was 20 conducted on Friday, August 30, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. For the reasons stated…

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.