Apportionment Between Song-Beverly Act Fees/Costs And Other Causes Of Action, Where Fees Are Not Permitted, Not Necessary Where Claims Are Inextricably Intertwined.
In our September 29, 2020 post, we discussed Santana v. FCA US, LLC, Case Nos. G057244/G058020 (4th Dist., Div. 3), which was unpublished at the time.
In Santana, the trial court awarded Song-Beverly Act fees/costs of $510,637.87, including a 2.0 multiplier, after a jury found defendant liable for breach of the express and implied warranty, and fraudulent concealment for plaintiff’s claims arising from the defective vehicle he purchased.
On appeal, the 4/3 DCA vacated a significant portion of damages awarded to plaintiff when it reversed on the fraudulent concealment claim. However, the appellate panel affirmed the entirety of the fees/costs awarded by the trial court – finding no abuse of discretion because apportionment between the Song-Beverly claims and non-fee claims was not needed given that plaintiff’s causes of action stemmed from an issue common to all of his claims. As such, plaintiff’s claims were inextricably intertwined such that apportionment would be impracticable, if not impossible.
Santana was certified for publication on October 23, 2020.
Comments