Civil Rights
Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In plaintiff's action against the Ford Motor Credit Company (Ford) claiming that Ford's billing practices under a retail installment sales contract in charging late fees is prohibited by the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act, and actionable under Unfair Competition Law and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, dismissal of the suit is affirmed where: 1) Ford's conduct of charging successive late fees for successive late payments does not violate Civil Code section 2982(k)'s prohibition on charging more than one late fee per delinquent installment; 2) plaintiff cannot allege Ford's billing practice is an unfair business practice within the meaning of UCL because the alleged injury is one plaintiff reasonably could have avoided; and 3) although Ford was the prevailing party, it cannot recover its attorney's fees pursuant to the Rees-Levering's reciprocal attorney's fees provision because the alleged Rees-Levering violation was merely a predicate to the UCL claims, and a prevailing defendant cannot recover attorney's fees under the UCL.
Read Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Co. , No. B204047 [HTML]
Read Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Co. , No. B204047 [PDF]
Appellate Information
Filed November 19, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Klein
Counsel
For Appellant: Levy, Ram & Olson, Arthur D. Levy, Erica L. Craven; The Harris Law Firm, Aurora D. Harris
For Appellee: Severson & Werson, Jan T. Chilton, Mark Joseph Kenney, Regina J. McClendon and Joshua E. Whitehair
Sign into your Legal Forms and Services account to manage your estate planning documents.
Sign InCreate an account allows to take advantage of these benefits: