Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Blue Bird Body Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 24, 2000No. G021708PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RYLAARSDAM, J.

Plaintiffs Mark and Cynthia Mitchell appeal from a judgment for defendant Blue Bird Body Company in an action brought under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. (Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq.; all further statutory references are to the Civil Code unless otherwise noted.) The question presented is whether persons who purchase a new motor vehicle on credit can recover from the manufacturer the finance charges paid by them when exercising the remedy of restitution authorized by section 1793.2, subdivision (d)(2) (hereafter section 1793.2(d)(2)). The answer is yes, and we…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. People v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Murillo v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Jensen v. BMW of North America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  2. Martinez v. Kia Motors America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  3. Kirzhner v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  4. Abram Soto et al. v. General Motors LLC et al.District Court, C.D. California · 2025
  5. Annette Carrillo v. FCA US, LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2021

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API