Cal. Codes » Civil Code
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 1790 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

This chapter may be cited as the “Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 562 cases (329 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: R & B Auto Ctr., Inc. v. Farmers Grp., Inc., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4850 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
R & B Auto Ctr., Inc. v. Farmers Grp., Inc., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4850 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “(See the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civ.Code, § 1790 et seq.). Here, a car dealership licensed to sell only used cars sent out a bid for lemon law insurance, including coverage for liability arising in connection with the sale of "title branded" lemon law buyback…”
Murillo v. Fleetwood Enter., Inc., 953 P.2d 858 (Cal. 1998). · cites it 6× “) [1] More specifically, however, the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq. (hereafter sometimes the Song-Beverly Act or the Act)) contains a cost-shifting provision that expressly allows prevailing plaintiffs to recover their costs, including attorney…”
Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., 353 P.3d 741 (Cal. 2015). · cites it 2× “Code, §§ 17200–17210), the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civ. Code, §§ 1790–1795.8), and Public Resources Code section 42885.”
Cont'l T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36 (1977). · cites it 2× “, Cal. Civ. Code Ann. § 1790 et seq. (West 1973).”
Birdsong v. Apple, Inc., 590 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “Code § 2315; (4) violation of the California UCL, Cal.”
Carver v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 569 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “The Supreme Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the more specific provisions of the Song-Beverly Act prohibited the prevailing defendants from obtaining such recovery, and therefore those defendants were allowed to recover their costs and expert witness fees.”
Gutierrez v. Carmax Auto Superstores Cal., 228 Cal. Rptr. 3d 699 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). “) Here the alleged wrongdoing is a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability imposed by the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act ( Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq. ). Under the circumstances of this case, which involves the sale of a used automobile, the element of wrongdoing is…”
Duale v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 19 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Duale as the prevailing parties on their cause of action for violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Song-Beverly Act; Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq.), popularly known as the automobile “lemon law.”
Goglin v. BMW of North Am., LLC, 4 Cal. App. 5th 462 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “, doing business as BMW of San Diego (BMW San Diego) appeal from a judgment awarding Nancy Goglin over $185,000 in attorney fees and costs for successfully settling her claims under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Song-Beverly Act) (Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq.) and other…”
Warren v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 241 Cal. Rptr. 3d 263 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). “57 in damages pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act ( Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq. ) 1 (the Song-Beverly Act), commonly known as California's "lemon law.”
Hanna v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 248 Cal. Rptr. 3d 654 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019). “*496 To settle Mary Hanna's lawsuit under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act ( Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq. ), Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC agreed on January 27, 2017 to pay Hanna $ 60,000 plus a sum equal to her costs and expenses in pursuing the action, "including attorney's fees…”
Elias v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 903 F. Supp. 2d 843 (N.D. Cal. 2012). · cites it 2× “; (5) violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civil Code §§ 1790, et seq.; and (6) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.”
Show all 562 citing cases →
— Cal. Civil Code § 1790(d) — 1 case
Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 749 F. Supp. 2d 980 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.