SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT
DEPARTMENT 53
JORGE BARRERA; Plaintiff, vs. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC, et al.; Defendants.
Case No.: BC610868
Hearing Date: November 15, 2016
Time: 8:30 a.m.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Plaintiff JORGE BARRERA’S motion for attorneys’ fees and costs is GRANTED.
The Court awards attorneys’ fees and costs in favor of Plaintiff JORGE BARRERA and against Defendant JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC in the amount of $14,269.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jorge Barrera (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on February 19, 2016 against Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (“Defendant”). The Complaint asserts one cause of action for violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (“Song-Beverly”). The record reflects that, prior to initiating this lawsuit, Plaintiff requested a repurchase of his allegedly defective vehicle. Defendant denied the repurcha
Hearing Date
November 15, 2016
Type
Othr Breach Contr/Warr-not Fraud (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT
DEPARTMENT 53
JORGE BARRERA; Plaintiff, vs. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC, et al.; Defendants.
Case No.: BC610868
Hearing Date: November 15, 2016
Time: 8:30 a.m.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Plaintiff JORGE BARRERA’S motion for attorneys’ fees and costs is GRANTED.
The Court awards attorneys’ fees and costs in favor of Plaintiff JORGE BARRERA and against Defendant JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC in the amount of $14,269.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jorge Barrera (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on February 19, 2016 against Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (“Defendant”). The Complaint asserts one cause of action for violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (“Song-Beverly”). The record reflects that, prior to initiating this lawsuit, Plaintiff requested a repurchase of his allegedly defective vehicle. Defendant denied the repurcha