Lemon Law Cases Successes
Mark F. Anderson’s Record of Lemon Law Successes in the Trial and Appellate Courts
MARK ANDERSON’S CLIENTS PREVAILED IN THE FOLLOWING JURY TRIALS:
Mosiman v Country Coach, Inc., Civil No. SCV 239670 (Sonoma County Superior Court)
Steve and Helen Mosiman purchased a new Country Coach Allure motor home in February 2006 that had a defective electrical system. After 7 repair visits and 70 days in the shop, the Mosimans gave up seeking repairs in favor of a lawsuit. In October 2008, a Santa Rosa jury awarded the Mosimans $337,000, in return for the motor home.
Verakis v Monaco Coach Corporation, Civil No. AS05906 (Sacramento County Superior Court)
Mr and Mrs Verakis bought a 40′ Holiday Rambler motor home that a serious defect–there was no heat in the bedroom of the coach. Monaco took the position that that was just a “comfort” issue, but in 2004, a Sacramento jury disagreed awarding the buyers the purchase price and damages of $312,444.
Sanbeck v Fleetwood Motor homes, Civil No. 68541 (Nevada County Superior Court)
Mr and Mrs Sanbeck purchased a Fleetwood motor home that leaked when it rained. Fleetwood claimed it had fixed the problem, but in 2003, the jury awarded the Sanbecks their actual damages of $49,866 and a civil penalty of $10,000.
Harvill v Fleetwood Motorhomes, Civil No. 315725 (San Francisco Superior Court)
Suzanne Harvill bought a Fleetwood motor home that had a serious defect–the coach was not properly attached to the chassis. Fleetwood claimed Ms Harvill’s late husband caused the damages when he put a hole in the floor of the coach for their cat to get down to a compartment. The jury did not buy that tall tale; in 2002, the jury awarded Ms. Harvill damages of $103,500 and a civil penalty of $103,500. Fleetwood appealed, but the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment.
Palmer v Fleetwood Motor homes, Civil No. 009496 (San Joaquin County Superior Court)
In 2001, Mr and Mrs Palmer’s Fleetwood motor home had four substantial defects that Fleetwood claimed had all been fixed. However, the jury did not think so and they awarded the Palmers damages of $87,018 and a civil penalty of $65,000. Fleetwood lost on appeal.
MARK F. ANDERSON’S PUBLISHED APPELLATE VICTORIES:
Jensen v BMW of North America (1995) 36 Cal. App. 4th 112
In this case, Mark F. Anderson represented the buyer of a BMW sold with the balance of the new car warranty. BMW argued at trial and on appeal, that the California lemon law did not cover the car. Both courts rejected that argument. The appellate ruling interpreted the lemon law to protect consumers. The opinion gave California buyers of used cars and trucks sold with the balance of the new car warranty the protection of the California lemon law.
Graham v DaimlerChrysler (2005) 34 Cal. 4th 553.
In this class action lawsuit, plaintiffs alleged that the Dakota RT trucks’ towing capacity was less than advertised. As a result of the lawsuit, the manufacturer quickly offered to buy back or replace all the trucks affected by the lawsuit. DaimlerChrysler refused to recognize that the lawsuit triggered its decision to repurchase the trucks and to pay reasonable attorney’s fees. This dispute set continued over eight years in the appellate and trial courts. In 2005, the California Supreme Court held that attorneys whose lawsuit was the catalyst for Mark F. Anderson was one of the attorneys who successfully prosecuted this case that went to the California Supreme Court.