Opinion
S222211
12-15-2016
RACEWAY FORD CASES
E054517/E056595 Fourth Appellate District, Div. 2
Opinion filed: Affirmed in part, reversed in part
For the reasons above, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the Court of Appeal with respect to Class One's claims. Because plaintiffs do not assert the APRs disclosed on plaintiffs' contracts are inaccurate within the tolerances permitted by Regulation Z, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal to the extent it directs the trial court to conduct further proceedings concerning Class One's claims under the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act (Civ. Code, § 2981 et seq.), and to the extent it vacates and directs further proceedings concerning the award of attorney's fees related to Class One's claims. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal with respect to Class One's claims and Class Two's claims. Finally, we disapprove Nelson v. Pearson Ford Co., supra, 186 Cal.App.4th 983 to the extent it is inconsistent with this opinion.
Majority Opinion by Liu, J.
-- Cantil-Sakauye, C. J., Werdegar, Chin, Corrigan, Cuéllar, and Kruger, JJ.