Motion to Compel Deposition of
MARKOS vs HYUNDAI Defendant Hyundai Motor America's
CVRI2204188
MOTOR AMERICA Person(s) Most Qualified by MAGED
SHAWKY MARKOS
Tentative Ruling: Denied without prejudice.
Factual and procedural background: On 11/28/21, Plaintiff purchased a new Hyundai Ioniq, Vin
No. KMHC65LD6NU276329 (the “Vehicle”), which was manufactured by Defendant. He
contends that the Vehicle exhibited numerous defects and nonconformities, which were covered
by warranties. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant was unable to fixed these defects and
nonconformities after several attempts and has failed to replace the Vehicle. (Compl., ¶¶ 5-12.)
The operative Complaint asserts causes of action for: (1) Breach of Implied Warranty under the
Song-Beverly Act, (2) Breach of Express Warranty under the Song-Beverly Act, (3) Breach of
Express Warranty under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty
Hearing Date
June 22, 2023
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Motion to Compel Deposition of
MARKOS vs HYUNDAI Defendant Hyundai Motor America's
CVRI2204188
MOTOR AMERICA Person(s) Most Qualified by MAGED
SHAWKY MARKOS
Tentative Ruling: Denied without prejudice.
Factual and procedural background: On 11/28/21, Plaintiff purchased a new Hyundai Ioniq, Vin
No. KMHC65LD6NU276329 (the “Vehicle”), which was manufactured by Defendant. He
contends that the Vehicle exhibited numerous defects and nonconformities, which were covered
by warranties. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant was unable to fixed these defects and
nonconformities after several attempts and has failed to replace the Vehicle. (Compl., ¶¶ 5-12.)
The operative Complaint asserts causes of action for: (1) Breach of Implied Warranty under the
Song-Beverly Act, (2) Breach of Express Warranty under the Song-Beverly Act, (3) Breach of
Express Warranty under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty