Khoshnevis v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. CA2/8

Filed 4/30/21 Khoshnevis v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

VAHID KHOSHNEVIS, B301461

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC554887) v.

TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark V. Mooney, Judge. Affirmed.

Rosner, Barry & Babbitt, Hallen D. Rosner, Arlyn L. Escalante; Strategic Legal Practices and Payam Shahian for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Horvitz & Levy, John A. Taylor, Jr., Joshua C. McDaniel; Sutton & Murphy, Thomas M. Murphy and Krisann K. Aquino for Defendant and Respondent.

______________________

Vahid Khoshnevis appeals the trial court’s order shifting costs after a jury awarded him less than the amount he would have received had he accepted a pretrial offer to compromise pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998.1 Appellant challenges the court’s cost-shifting order on the ground the offer to compromise was invalid under section 998. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Khoshnevis leased a vehicle from Toyota. He had to bring it in for service six times because the check engine light blinked continuously. After about a year, he demanded that Toyota repurchase the vehicle. Toyota declined to do so. In August 2014, Khoshnevis filed a complaint against Toyota alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civil Code section 1790 et seq., commonly known as California’s “lemon law.” Before trial, Toyota offered to settle the action and served an offer to compromise pursuant to section 998. Toyota offered to pay Khoshnevis $20,857.27 in restitution and $10,000 in attorney fees, and to take the vehicle back. In return, Toyota wanted Khoshnevis to deliver the car with clear title, file a request for dismissal of the action, and sign a general release. The offer was presented on pleading paper under the caption of the lawsuit. There was no general release attached to the offer. Here are the exact words of the settlement offer: