MING SITU v. TESLA MOTORS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION Document 1: Document

Superior Court of California, County of Alameda
Case No. 23CV032792
Filed May 8, 2023

Complaint Filed by: YUE MING SITU (Plaintiff) As to: TESLA MOTORS, INC., a Delaware corporation (Defendant)

BackBack to MING SITU v. TESLA MOTORS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.

  Formatted Text Tab Overlap Raw Text Right End
Page 1
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.
Michelle Yang, Esq. (SBN 325467)
Andrea Plata, Esq. (SBN 343766)
6420 Wilshire Blvd., Suite Los Angeles, CA Telephone: (310) 933-Fax: (310) 933-Electronic Service: eservice@plsfirm.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
YUE MING SITU
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.

YUE MING SITU, an individual,

Plaintiff,
Hon.
Dept.:

Case No.:
vs.
TESLA MOTORS, INC., a Delaware
corporation, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive,
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF
STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants.
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 2 Plaintiff Yue Ming Situ (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows:

PARTIES

6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.

1.
As used in this Complaint, the word "Plaintiff” shall refer to Plaintiff Yue Ming
2.
Plaintiff is, and at all times relevant herein was, a resident of Richmond,
Situ.
California.
3.
As used in this Complaint, the word "Defendant" shall refer to Defendant Tesla
Motors, Inc.
4.
Defendant is, and at all times relevant herein was, a corporation

incorporated/organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered to conduct business

in California. At all times relevant herein, Defendant was engaged in the business of designing,

manufacturing, assembling, producing, constructing, marketing, distributing, and/or selling

consumer goods, including but not limited to motor vehicles and motor vehicle components.

5.
Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued under

the fictitious names “DOES 1 to 10”. These Defendants are sued pursuant to Code of Civil

Procedure section 474. When Plaintiff becomes aware of the true names and capacities of the

Defendants sued as DOES 1 to 10, Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to state their true names

and capacities.

6.
Plaintiff
hereby
revokes
acceptance
of
their

Tesla
Y,
5YJYGDEE8MF253035 (“Subject Vehicle”).
7.
Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial on all causes of action asserted herein.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST DEFENDANT

VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.
8.

VIN
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs set
forth above.
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 3 9.

Vehicle is a new motor vehicle, as the term is defined by California Civil Code section

1793.22(e)(2).1 Subject Vehicle was manufactured and/or distributed by Defendant.
10.

6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
Plaintiff purchased and used Subject Vehicle primarily for personal, family, or

household purposes. Plaintiff purchased Subject Vehicle from a person or entity engaged in the

business of manufacturing, distributing, selling, or leasing consumer goods at retail.
11.

PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.
On or around August 12, 2021, Plaintiff purchased Subject Vehicle. Subject
When the Subject Vehicle was purchased, Plaintiff received express written

warranties in which Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of

Subject Vehicle or to provide compensation if there is a failure in utility or performance for a

specified period of time.

nonconformity developed within Subject Vehicle during the applicable warranty period,

Plaintiff could deliver Subject Vehicle for repair to Defendant's authorized service and repair

facilities and Subject Vehicle would be repaired.
12.

The warranty provided, in relevant part, that in the event a
During Plaintiff’s ownership of Subject Vehicle, the Subject Vehicle manifested

defects covered by Defendant’s express written warranties. These defects include but are not

limited to: engine, electrical, and structural system defects (Subject Vehicle’s “defects”). These

defects substantially impair the use, value, and/or safety of Subject Vehicle to Plaintiff.
13.

Plaintiff delivered Subject Vehicle to Defendant and/or its authorized service and
repair facilities for diagnosis and repair of the defects.
14.

Defendant and/or its authorized service and repair facilities failed to service or

repair Subject Vehicle to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable number

of opportunities to do so.
15.

Despite this fact, Defendant failed to promptly replace Subject Vehicle or make
restitution to Plaintiff as required by Civil Code section 1793.2(d).

All subsequent references to the Civil Code refer to the California Civil Code.
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 4 16.
Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations

under Civil Code section 1793.2(d), and therefore brings this cause of action pursuant to Civil

Code section 1794.

17.
Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code section

1793.2(d) was willful, in that Defendant and its representatives knew of their legal obligations

and intentionally declined to follow them. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to a civil penalty of

up to two times Plaintiff’s actual damages, pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST DEFENDANT

VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (B) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.
6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.

18.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs set
forth above.
19.
Defendant maintains service and repair facilities and/or designates independent

service and repair facilities (Defendant’s “representatives”). Defendant’s representatives are

intended to carry out the terms of Defendant’s express warranties.

20.
Although Plaintiff presented Subject Vehicle to Defendant's representatives in

this state for repair of Subject Vehicle, Defendant and/or its representatives failed to commence

repairs within a reasonable time, in violation of Civil Code section 1793.2(b).

21.
Although Plaintiff presented Subject Vehicle to Defendant's representatives in

this state for repair of Subject Vehicle, Defendant and/or its representatives failed to complete

repairs within thirty days, in violation of Civil Code section 1793.2(b). Plaintiff did not extend

the time for completion of repairs beyond the requisite thirty days.

22.
Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendant's and/or its representatives’ failure to

comply with Civil Code section 1793.2(b). Thus, Plaintiff brings this cause of action pursuant

to Civil Code section 1794.

23.
Plaintiff has rightfully rejected and/or justifiably revoked acceptance of Subject

Vehicle and has exercised their right to cancel the contract. By serving this Complaint, Plaintiff

does so again.
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 5
1793.2(b) was willful, in that Defendant and its representatives knew of their legal obligations

and intentionally declined to follow them. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to a civil penalty of

two times Plaintiff’s actual damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST DEFENDANT

VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (A)(3) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.
6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code section

PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.
24.
25.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs set
forth above.
26.
In violation of Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3), Defendant failed to make

available to its authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and/or

replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period.

27.
Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations

pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3), and therefore brings this cause of action pursuant

to Civil Code section 1794.

28.
Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code section

1793.2(a)(3) was willful, in that Defendant knew of its legal obligations and intentionally

declined to follow them. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to a civil penalty of two times

Plaintiff's actual damages, pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST DEFENDANT

BREACH OF THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY

(CIV. CODE § 1791.1; § 1794)

29.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs set
forth above.
30.
Pursuant to Civil Code section 1792, the sale of Subject Vehicle was
accompanied by Defendant's implied warranty of merchantability. Pursuant to Civil Code
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 6
section 1791.1(c), the duration of the implied warranty is coextensive in duration with the

duration of the express written warranty provided by Defendant.
31.
6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.

Due to the aforementioned defects, Subject Vehicle was not of the same quality

as those generally acceptable in the trade; did not pass without objection in the trade; was not

fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; was not adequately contained,

packaged, and labeled; and/or did not measure up to the promises or facts stated on the container

or label.

32.
Plaintiff was harmed by the breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.

33.
Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under the implied warranty

was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s harm. Thus, Plaintiff brings this cause of action

pursuant to Civil Code section 1794.
PRAYER

Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant as follows:

a. For Plaintiff’s actual damages in an amount according to proof;

b. For restitution;

c. For a civil penalty in the amount of two times Plaintiff’s actual damages
pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c);

d. For any consequential and incidental damages in an amount according to

proof;

e. For remedies authorized by California Commercial Code sections 2711,

2712, and/or 2713;

f. For costs and expenses of the suit, and for Plaintiff’s reasonable

attorneys’ fees, pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(d);

g. For prejudgment interest at the legal rate; and

h. For such other equitable or legal relief as the Court may deem proper.

///

///

///
COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Page 7 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial on all causes of action asserted herein.

Dated: May 5,
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.
BY:
_________________________________
Michelle Yang, Esq.
Andrea Plata, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
YUE MING SITU

6420 WILSHIRE BLVD., STE. 200, LOS ANGELES, CA
PRESTIGE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, P.C.

COMPLAINT; JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Space
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
 
PlainSite
Sign Up
Need Password Help?