ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> CalBizLit

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Litigation

: CalBizLit

Breaking News: Big Win for Automobile Dealers in Lease Documents Cases

By Bruce Nye

ADVERTISEMENTS

DealershipFor at least seven years, plaintiffs' counsel have tenaciously prosecuted In re Vehicle Lease Documents Cases (Trygar) in Los Angeles Superior Court.  This Unfair Competition Law case was brought by Ed Masry (of Erin Brockovich fame) on behalf of Louis Trygar and several other plaintiffs against nearly every new car automobile dealership in California.  (Mr. Masry passed away, and the case is now being prosecuted by two of his former associates.) 

Plaintiffs initially challenged the use of "pay-off adjustment forms" in connection with consumer vehicle leases as violations of the "single document rule."  Then, when that claim crashed on the Proposition 64 shoals, they proceeded with a purported class claim against all the dealerships based on claims that the dealerships hid "negative equity" -- amounts owed on traded in vehicles -- in new car leases.

Among many other problems, of course, was that neither Trygar nor the several other plaintiffs ever had a case against any of the dealerships other than the ones where they leased their vehicles.  And under Proposition 64, they couldn't sue dealerships that hadn't caused them injury in fact.  So Trygar moved for leave to conduct discovery against all 1400+ dealerships so that he could go through their records finding customers who could serve as class representatives against each of the defendants.

The parties soon realized that this discovery motion was the entire battle, and the battle lasted more than a year, with some four sets of briefs filed by either side.   

Monday, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Anthony Mohr ruled, and it's a slam dunk for the defense:  no discovery allowed.  The Plaintiffs are invited to bring a writ petition to the Court of Appeal.  But assuming the appeal fails, the case very probably is effectively over.  Judge Mohr's decision is here.

A very good day for the defense.  (Full disclosure:  CalBizLit doesn't usually engage in overly obvious bragging or shameless self-promotion, but will make an isolated exception here -- Bruce Nye was primary author of the defense briefs, working in consultation with an able and very helpful steering committee).

Full post as published by CalBizLit on November 29, 2007 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0228 secs (new cache)