Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/29/2021 at 12:03:06 (UTC).

GLORIA BYRON VS BMW OF NORTH AMERICA LLC

Case Summary

On 06/17/2016 GLORIA BYRON filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against BMW OF NORTH AMERICA LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are RICHARD E. RICO and JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4431

  • Filing Date:

    06/17/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

RICHARD E. RICO

JON R. TAKASUGI

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

BYRON GLORIA

Respondents and Defendants

BMW OF NORTH AMERICA LLC

SAVAGE BMW

DOES 1 THROUGH 10

BMW SAVAGE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff Attorneys

STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES APC

ROSENSTEIN MICHAEL H.

RUBEN DAVID NOEL

ROSENSTEIN MICHAEL HARRIS

SHAHIAN PAYAM

Defendant Attorney

LEHRMAN KATE S. ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Declaration - DECLARATION OF MARCY GRIBIN-SANCHEZ IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO ENFORCE THE DECEMBER 6, 2018 ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO MAKE HER VEHICLE AVAILABLE FOR AN OIL

10/4/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF MARCY GRIBIN-SANCHEZ IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO ENFORCE THE DECEMBER 6, 2018 ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO MAKE HER VEHICLE AVAILABLE FOR AN OIL

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

12/18/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

Declaration - DECLARATION OF GLORIA SOGOYAN ISO MOTION TO REOPEN DISCOVERY

1/13/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF GLORIA SOGOYAN ISO MOTION TO REOPEN DISCOVERY

Notice of Ruling

1/26/2021: Notice of Ruling

Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO.1

5/20/2021: Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO.1

Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5

5/20/2021: Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5

Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 11

5/20/2021: Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 11

Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12

5/20/2021: Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12

Statement of the Case - STATEMENT OF THE CASE JOINT STATEMENT OF STIPULATED FACTS

5/21/2021: Statement of the Case - STATEMENT OF THE CASE JOINT STATEMENT OF STIPULATED FACTS

Trial Brief

5/21/2021: Trial Brief

Minute Order -

4/17/2018: Minute Order -

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 3: TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES NOT DISCLOSED IN DISCOVERY

7/20/2018: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 3: TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES NOT DISCLOSED IN DISCOVERY

DEFENDANT BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM LAY WITNESSES; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SHARON SHIN

7/20/2018: DEFENDANT BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM LAY WITNESSES; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SHARON SHIN

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY -

8/29/2018: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY -

Opposition - Opposition PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICATION

10/31/2018: Opposition - Opposition PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICATION

Opposition - Opposition PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICAITON FOR ORDER COMPELLING OIL CONSUMPTION TESTS AND REPAIRS

2/6/2019: Opposition - Opposition PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICAITON FOR ORDER COMPELLING OIL CONSUMPTION TESTS AND REPAIRS

Association of Attorney - ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY NOTICE

4/17/2019: Association of Attorney - ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY NOTICE

Notice - NOTICE OF DISASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

4/18/2019: Notice - NOTICE OF DISASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

152 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/01/2021
  • Hearing11/01/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 17 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/21/2021
  • Hearing10/21/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 17 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/30/2021
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by Michael Harris Rosenstein (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2021
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (to Reopen Discovery) - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2021
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Jury Trial ((5-7 day estimate)) - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/27/2021
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/27/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/21/2021
  • DocketStatement of the Case (JOINT STATEMENT OF STIPULATED FACTS); Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/21/2021
  • DocketExhibit List (JOINT EXHIBIT LIST); Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/21/2021
  • DocketWitness List (JOINT WITNESS LIST); Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
249 More Docket Entries
  • 08/11/2016
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/25/2016
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by BMW of North America, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/25/2016
  • DocketDFFENDANT BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2016
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2016
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2016
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2016
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2016
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2016
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2016
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Gloria Byron (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC624431    Hearing Date: March 18, 2021    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

GLORIA BYRON

vs.

BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC

Case No.: BC624431

Hearing Date: March 18, 2021

Plaintiff’s motion to reopen discovery is DENIED.

On 6/17/2026, Plaintiff Gloria Byron (Plaintiff) filed suit against BMW of North America, LLC and Savage BMW for violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

Now, Plaintiff moves to reopen discovery to allow her to depose Senior BMW Engineer Michael Murray.

Discussion

Plaintiff argues she will be “severely prejudiced” if she is prevented from taking the deposition of Senior BMW Engineer Michael Murray, given that he can speak to BMW’s knowledge of defects with the N63 Engine. Alternatively, Plaintiff requests to submit transcripts, including exhibits of Mr. Murray’s depositions in several other cases that involve N63 engine defects.

Here, discovery closed on 12/2/2018. Plaintiff explains the failure to seek Mr. Murray’s deposition during discovery on the fact that “BMW only signaled its agreement to produce Mr. Murray for deposition in the other cases in a letter dated November 8, 2019.” (Motion, 14:3-7, emphasis added.)

As BMW NA noted in opposition, Plaintiff actually noticed Mr. Murray’s deposition on September 24, 2018. When BMW NA objected, Plaintiff did not file a motion to compel and took no further action to obtain Mr. Murray’s deposition until filing this motion, two and a half years later.

Plaintiff has offered no persuasive explanation as to why Plaintiff failed to move to compel the 2018 noticed deposition, or why Plaintiff waited over a year after receipt of BMW NA’s 2019 letter to move to re-open discovery here.

Also, crucially, the other cases referenced by Plaintiff are not related to, or consolidated with, this claim. Just because Plaintiff’s counsel has filed multiple actions against BMW NA does mean that discovery decisions in those cases have any bearing on this case. Moreover, the Court has no knowledge of the underlying facts of the other cases.

In support of her argument, Plaintiff contends that dealers and experts do not have access to the information Mr. Murray has, and writes:

…[H]is testimony is necessary to show “BMW’s willfulness in denying Plaintiff’s repurchase request despite having failed to conform the Subject Vehicle to the applicable warranties after a reasonable number of repair opportunities, giving rise to up to 2X civil penalty damages. Dealers and experts cannot provide such testimony. Michael Murray can.

(Motion, 2:25-3:2, original emphasis.)

Yet, by Plaintiff’s own admission, Michael Murray does not know Plaintiff, has never touched Plaintiff’s vehicle, and was not involved in the decision to not repurchase Plaintiff’s vehicle. Accordingly, the Court is unconvinced that only Michael Murray can speak to whether BMW willfully denied Plaintiff’s repurchase request, when Michael Murray had nothing to do with the decision to deny her repurchase request. This conclusion is reinforced by BMW NA’s opposition which claims that Plaintiff has misrepresented the deposition testimony provided by Mr. Murray in the separate cases. Specifically, Mr. Murray submitted a declaration stating, “These allegations are false and are contrary to the testimony I gave in my prior depositions. . . . I do not have any knowledge regarding plaintiff’s vehicle. I have never testified that the N63 engine is inherently defective. I have never testified that the N63 engine is incapable of being repaired. I have never testified that BMW NA decided not to disclose defects and conceal defects from consumers. None of these things is true.” (Murray Decl., ¶ 16.) Accordingly, the Court is not persuaded of Plaintiff’s contention that Mr. Murray has provided testimony elsewhere that BMW NA had knowledge of N63 engine defects which could be relevant here.

Plaintiff’s claims here concern her individual vehicle and its specific vehicle history. The Court is not persuaded that discovery should be reopened two years later to allow an individual to be deposed who has no personal knowledge of Plaintiff’s claim. While, of course, the Court understands the logic of Plaintiff’s argument, the Court simply cannot conclude that Plaintiff would be “severely prejudiced” if she was prevented from the taking the deposition of an individual who has no personal knowledge of her, her vehicle, or vehicle repair history. Plaintiff’s case turns on whether or not Defendants breached statutory duties owed to Plaintiff. That determination ultimately turns on the decisions made by the actual representatives involved in her vehicle’s repair, and the willfulness of their denials.

It is so ordered.

Dated: March , 2021

Hon. Jon R. Takasugi Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.

Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances. Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk. The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via L.A. Court Connect. For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517. Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Payam Shahian

Latest cases represented by Lawyer RUBEN DAVID N. ESQ.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer ROSENSTEIN MICHAEL HARRIS