Isaiah Gomez, an individual, on behalf of himself, the proposed class(es), all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public v. Mycles Cycles Inc. dba San Diego Harley-Davidson; Harley-Davidson Inc.; Harley-Davidson Motor Company Inc.; Harley-Davidson Motor Company Operations Inc.,, and Does 1 through 20, inclusive
Published: Aug. 5, 2022 | Result Date: Jun. 17, 2022 | Filing Date: Dec. 30, 2015 |Case number: 37-2015-00043311-CU-BT-CTL Settlement – Rebate
Judge
Court
San Diego County Superior Court
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Timothy R. Pestotnik
(Pestotnik LLP)
Ross H. Hyslop
(Pestotnik LLP)
Defendant
Paul L. Nystrom
(Dykema Gossett PLLC)
Facts
Isaiah Gomez brought a class action against Harley-Davidson, Inc. and related entities.
The class consisted of all consumers who, during the relevant period, purchased or leased a new, assembled Harley-Davidson motorcycle from San Diego Harley-Davidson, attached to which was a 'basic' price hang tag, and paid one or more of the following: more than Harley-Davidson's manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP) for the motorcycle; and/or any amount charged by the dealer for manufacturer-installed options and/or accessories; freight or transportation; assembly, preparation, or both of the motorcycle; and/or dealer-added accessories and/or optional equipment.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendants violated the California Business and Professions Code and the California Legal Remedies Act. Plaintiff asserted claims for aiding and abetting; intentional misrepresentation; negligence; negligent misrepresentation; quasi contract/assumpsit, and breach of express and implied warranties. Plaintiff asserted that defendants furnished illegal and/or non-compliant price hang tags to its California dealers that failed to comply with or violated the California Vehicle Code and other laws, regulations and requirements, did not submit its motorcycle price hang tags for review and approval by the California Department of Motor Vehicles, and/or improperly permitted dealers to create and/or modify motorcycle price hang tags in a misleading manner. Plaintiff contended that defendants represented in certain advertising that "setup fees" were excluded from MSRP even though California law requires manufacturers like defendants to specify (for the dealer) pre-delivery tasks and compensate/reimburse dealers for performing such tasks, and that the manufacturer defendant(s) did in fact specify their/its pre-delivery tasks to dealers and compensate/reimburse dealers for such specified pre-delivery tasks. Plaintiff further alleged that certain consumers who purchased new motorcycles were routinely charged fees by the dealer for the same tasks as "setup" or "dealer preparation."
DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.
Injuries
The parties conducted extensive arm's-length negotiations, including participating in four mediations. Justice Steven Stones of JAMS facilitated the mediation session that ultimately resulted in settlement.
Result
Defendants provided a rebate ranging from $400 to $600 to each settlement class member that purchased a new Harley-Davidson Motorcycle in accordance and in compliance with the terms, conditions and process set forth in the settlement agreement. Attorney fees and litigation costs/expenses in the amount of $1,650,000 was awarded to class counsel.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390