Judgment Reversed: The Ninth Circuit Rules That GMSR’s Clients Did Not Abandon A Favorable Jury Verdict Merely By Arguing That Post-Judgment Proceedings Were Unnecessary

GMSR’s clients, two retirees who unwittingly leased a defective car, secured favorable jury verdicts on two claims under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act: one for breach of express warranty and another for breach of implied warranty.  Recognizing that they were not entitled to a double recovery, they then elected to recover under the express warranty claim’s larger verdict and argued that a hearing on the defendant’s request for an offset on the implied warranty claim was unnecessary as a result.  The trial court held that by arguing that the hearing was unnecessary, plaintiffs abandoned any right to recover under the unelected remedy—even after the trial court tossed the express warranty verdict on a motion for judgment as a matter of law.

At GMSR’s urging, the Ninth Circuit reversed:  “It is not abandonment to refuse to concede to an opposing party on the merits of an issue squarely before the court,” here, the need for a hearing on the defendant’s entitlement to an offset as to a yet-to-be-elected remedy.

Ninth Circuit Memorandum Disposition:  Quintero v. Ford Motor Company (9th Cir. July 21, 2022, No. 20-55883) 2022 WL 2869771

In The News:

9th Circ. Vacates Veto Of Ford Drivers’ $23K PowerShift Award, Law360: (subscription required)