Mark Benedetti, et al. v. General Motors, LLC

method of discovery, and (ii) by disobeying a court order to provide discovery, (2) Defendant has been prejudiced by Plaintiff's misconduct, and (3) the evidence shows that the less severe sanction of monetary sanctions has not produced compliance with the discovery rules. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2023.010, subds. (d), (g).)

The court therefore finds that it is appropriate, and exercises its discretion, to impose terminating sanctions against Plaintiff. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2023.030, subd. (d)(1).)

The court declines to impose monetary sanctions under the Civil Discovery Act because it finds that the circumstances presented would make the imposition of further monetary sanctions unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2023.030, subd. (a).) Defendant has obtained terminating sanctions, and so additional monetary sanctions are unnecessary.

The court also declines to impose monetary sanctions under Civil Code section 871.26, subdivision (j), because it finds that the failure of Plaintiff to sit for deposition is due to the absence of Plaintiff himself, not any wrongdoing by counsel. Thus, Plaintiff's attorney has shown good cause for counsel's failure to comply with the statute--i.e., because the actions of the client are beyond counsel's control. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 871.26, subd. (j)(2) [sanctions to be imposed against plaintiff's attorney for non-compliance unless party failing to comply demonstrates good cause].)

ORDER

The court GRANTS defendant General Motors, LLC's motion for terminating sanctions. The court orders that the First Amended Complaint filed December 12, 2023 by Giancarlo Ricci against General Motors, LLC is dismissed with prejudice. All future hearings are advanced to this date and vacated. The court orders defendant General Motors, LLC to give notice of this ruling. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: August 24, 2026 _____________________________ Robert B. Broadbelt III Judge of the Superior Court

Court of California County of Los Angeles - Central District Department 513 Mark Benedetti, et al.;

Plaintiffs, vs. General Motors, LLC; Defendant. | Case No.: |

| | | Hearing Date: | August 24, 2026 | | | Time: | 10:00 a.m. | | | [Tentative] Order RE: Demurrer to First Amended Complaint | MOVING PARTY: Defendant General Motors, LLC RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs Mark Benedetti and Benedetti, LP Demurrer to First Amended Complaint

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION

Defendant General Motors, LLC ("Defendant") demurs to the First Amended Complaint filed by plaintiffs Mark Benedetti and Benedetti, LP ("Plaintiffs") as to the fourth cause of action for breach of implied warranty and fifth cause of action for fraudulent concealment.

The court sustains the demurrer as to the fourth cause of action for breach of implied warranty because the four-year statute of limitations has run. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 430.10, subd. (e).) Implied warranty claims are also subject to a four-year statute of limitations. (Comm. Code, Sec. 2725; Montoya v. Ford Motor Co. (2020) 46 Cal.App.5th 493, 495.)

Under subdivision (b) of section 2725 of the Commercial Code, a breach of warranty occurs--and thus, a claim accrues--"when tender of delivery is made, except that where a warranty explicitly extends to future performance of the goods and discovery of the breach must await the time of such performance[,] the cause of action accrues when the breach is or should have been discovered." (Comm. Code, Sec. 2725, subd. (b).) Unlike express warranty claims, an implied warranty does not "explicitly extend to future performance of the goods." (Cardinal Health 301, Inc. v. Tyco Elecs. Corp. (2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 116, 134.)

Plaintiffs allege entry into a warranty contract on May 7, 2021. (Complaint P. 7.) Thus, to be timely, the deadline to file the original Complaint was May 7, 2025. The Complaint was instead filed May 29, 2025, 22 days after the deadline. The fourth cause of action is therefore time-barred.

The court overrules the demurrer as to the fifth cause of action for fraudulent concealment because Plaintiffs have adequately alleged a delayed accrual of their fraud claim. Code of Civil Procedure section 338(d) states that a party has three years to bring an action for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake, and that "[t]he cause of action in that case is not deemed to have accrued until the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts constituting the fraud or mistake. " (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 338, subd. (d) [emphasis added].)

The pleadings allege that the defect persisted despite repair attempts. (FAC P. 37.) The pleadings also allege that Defendant issued numerous Technical Service Bulletins which purported to address the vehicle's symptoms but attributed the source to other causes. (FAC P.P. 47-48.) The pleadings allege that these TSBs misdirected consumers and prevented discovery of the defects. (Id.) Construed favorably, as required on demurrer, these allegations are sufficient to invoke the delayed discovery rule.

The burden is on the plaintiff "to articulate how it could amend its pleading to render it sufficient." ¿ (Palm Springs Villas II Homeowners Assn., Inc. v. Parth ¿ (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 268, 290.) ¿ To satisfy that burden, a plaintiff " must show in what manner he can amend his complaint and how that amendment will change the legal effect of his pleading. " ¿ (Goodman v. Kennedy ¿ (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.) ¿ The court finds that Plaintiffs has not articulated the facts that they could allege to render the fourth cause of action sufficient and therefore sustains the demurrer without leave to amend.

ORDER

The court SUSTAINS defendant General Motors, LLC's demurrer to plaintiffs Mark Benedetti and Benedetti, LP's fourth cause of action without leave to amend.

The court OVERRULES defendant General Motors, LLC's demurrer to plaintiffs Mark Benedetti and Benedetti, LP's fifth cause of action. The court orders defendant General Motors, LLC to give notice of this ruling. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: August 24, 2026 _____________________________ Robert B. Broadbelt III Judge of the Superior Court Case Number: 25STCV38046 Hearing Date: August 24, 2026 Dept: 513 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles - Central District Department 513 Michael Jones; Plaintiffs, vs. Backcountry.Com, LLC, et al., Defendants. | Case No.: | 25STCV38046 | | | Hearing Date: | August 24, 2026 | | | Time: | 10:00 a.m. | | |