Legal Opinion
Quacchia v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 15, 2004No. A102544PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RIVERA, J.
Plaintiff Eileen Quacchia appeals after the trial court denied her motion for class certification. We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that common issues do not predominate in this action. Accordingly, we affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
Certain vehicles manufactured by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation (DCC) contain a seat belt buckle known as the “Gen-III” buckle. Plaintiff, the owner of a Dodge Caravan equipped with Gen-III buckles, brought this action, alleging the Gen-III buckles were subject to accidental release at any time, especially in the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Bank of the West v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Barker v. Lull Engineering Co.California Supreme Court · 1978
- City of San Jose v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Badie v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. InmanTexas Supreme Court · 2008
- Munson v. Del Taco, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2009
- Bufil v. Dollar Financial Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Dailey v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Keegan v. American Honda Motor Co.District Court, C.D. California · 2012
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.