Ramirez contends the court erred in denying her class certification motion because the court based its denial on an erroneous legal analysis of the Rees-Levering Act. We conclude this contention has merit and reverse the order. We remand to permit the court to consider the propriety of the class certification motion without the improper legal analysis.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In December 2006, Ramirez purchased an automobile from a Honda dealer under a conditional sale contract obligating her to make monthly payments. As part of the purchase, Ramirez filled out a credit application. Shortly after the purchase, the dealer assigned the contract to Balboa. During the next three years, Ramirez often missed required payments. In about May 2009, Ramirez stopped making payments and voluntarily surrendered her vehicle to Balboa.
Judge(s): Judith L. Haller
Jurisdiction: California Court of Appeals, Fourth District
Related Categories: Civil Procedure , Finance / Banking
|Trial Court Judge(s)|
|Court of Appeals Judge(s)|
|Appellant Lawyer(s)||Appellant Law Firm(s)|
|Mark Anderson||Anderson Ogilvie & Brewer|
|Appellee Lawyer(s)||Appellee Law Firm(s)|
|Michael Dawson||Law Offices of Herbert Hafif|
|Greg Hafif||Law Offices of Herbert Hafif|
|Herbert Hafif||Law Offices of Herbert Hafif|