United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER RE: PROPOSED FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Court has reviewed the parties' proposed jury
instructions and has prepared the attached proposed final
jury instructions regarding the legal claims and defenses
under the Song-Beverly Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1790 et
seq. In addition, the Court has several questions regarding
the parties' claims and defenses. The parties shall each
file a written response to this Order and the proposed final
jury instructions by noon on Friday, September 13, 2019. The
response shall include citations to legal authority.
the damages for a breach of implied warranty claim differ
from the damages for a breach of express warranty claim? If
so, how are the implied warranty damages calculated? See
Isip v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 155 Cal.App.4th 19, 25
Defendant advancing a statute of limitations affirmative
defense? If so, explain how the defense applies as a factual
matter and whether the defense applies to both the express
and implied warranty claims?
Plaintiff contend that the vehicle had a defect at the time
did Plaintiff discover the defect?
there a factual dispute regarding the number of miles the
vehicle was driven before it was first presented to
Defendant's authorized repair facility for a repair?
IS SO ORDERED.
you follow these instructions, I will give you a brief
summary of the parties' positions.
Bernstein asserts that BMW breached the express and implied
warranties provided with her 2013 BMW 328i. Karen Bernstein
has the burden of proving these claims by a preponderance of
denies those claims. BMW also claims that Karen
Bernstein's lawsuit was not filed within the time limits
set by law. BMW has the burden of proving this defense by a
preponderance of the evidence.
OF PROOF - PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
party has the burden of proof on any claim by a preponderance
of the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the
evidence that the claim is more probably true than not true.
should base your decision on all the evidence, regardless of
which party presented it.
TO PROMPTLY REPURCHASE OR REPLACE NEW MOTOR VEHICLE AFTER
REASONABLE NUMBER OF REPAIR OPPORTUNITIES - ESSENTIAL FACTUAL
Bernstein claims that BMW failed to promptly repurchase or
replace her 2013 BMW 328i after a reasonable number of repair
opportunities. To establish this claim, Karen Bernstein must
prove all of the following:
1. That she purchased a 2013 BMW 328i manufactured and/or
distributed by BMW;
2. That BMW gave Karen Bernstein a written warranty that BMW
would maintain the utility of the subject vehicle for 4 ...