Matthew Amans and Babak Malek, individually, and on behalf of all similarly situated v. Tesla Inc.
Published: Feb. 23, 2024 | Result Date: Oct. 20, 2023 | Filing Date: May 12, 2021 |Case number: 3:21-cv-03577-VC Settlement – $6,080,000
Judge
Court
USDC Northern District of California
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Eve-Lynn Rapp
(Edelson PC)
Justin T. Berger
(Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP)
Sarvenaz J. Fahimi
(Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP)
Peter A. Muhic
(The Miller Law Firm PC)
Defendant
David C. Marcus
(Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr LLP)
Allison Bingxue Que
(Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr LLP)
Alan E. Schoenfeld
(Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr LLP)
Ryan M. Chabot
(Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr LLP)
Facts
Matthew Amans and Babak Malek entered into contracts with Telsa Inc. (Tesla) for the installation of a Solar Roof in April 2021. Tesla increased the prices to be charged to existing consumers for the Solar Roofs. On May 12, 2021, Amans, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, brought a putative class action against Tesla. The class included all persons with whom Telssa entered into a contract for the purchase and/or installation of a Solar Roof with or without a Powerwall energy storage system in the United States and whom Telsa notified, in or around April 2021, would be required to pay an increased price as a condition for performance of the contract. On May 17, 2021, and July 20, 2021, Sol Kim, Aaron Mandell, Alissa Beth, Cohen Mandell, Mattias Astrom, Arpan Patel, Anupama Vivek, Jerin Zacariah, Peter Burns, and Babak Malek filed separate complaints related to the same conduct. On February 22, 202, Amans and Babek filed their amended complaint, asserting breach of contract, violation of California's Unfair Competition Law, California Business & Professions Code, California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and the Truth In Lending Act.
Contentions
PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendant increasing the price of the Solar Roofs was a breach of contract and violated several other federal and state consumer protection laws. Plaintiffs sought to have defendant honor consumers' contracts at the original price and compensate them for losses related to preparations for the installation of a contracted-for Solar Roof.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all contentions.
Settlement Discussions
On January 14, 2022, the parties attended a full-day scheduled videoconference mediation session with Robert A. Meyer, Esq. of JAMS.
Result
The parties reached an agreement wherein Tesla admitted no wrongdoing or liability but agreed to pay $6.08 million to settle class members' claims.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390