United States District Court, D. Nevada
WYNN HOLDINGS, LLC, a Montana limited liability company, Plaintiff,
ROLLS-ROYCE MOTOR CARS NA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; TOWBIN MOTOR CARS, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company; DOES I through X, inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive, Defendants.
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court are Defendant Rolls-Royce Motor Cars NA, LLC's
Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 57, and Defendant Towbin
Motor Cars, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No.
63. Plaintiff Wynn Holdings, LLC opposed both motions, ECF
No. 72, and Defendants both filed responses, ECF Nos. 78, 79.
sued Defendants in state court on December 6, 2016. ECF No.
1-2. Defendant Rolls-Royce removed the matter to this Court
on January 13, 2017. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff filed a First
Amended Complaint on March 2, 2017. ECF No. 10. In the
Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleges six claims: (1) a
violation of Nevada's Lemon Law, NRS 597.600 et seq.; (2)
breach of contract; (3) breach of implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing; (4) breach of express warranty; (5)
violation of Nevada's Deceptive Trade Practices Act; and
(6) violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Id.
Both Defendants now move for summary judgment through
separate motions. ECF Nos. 57, 63. The Court heard oral
argument on the motions on January 15, 2019. ECF Nos. 94, 96.
Court finds the following facts to be undisputed. This matter
centers on the purchase of an allegedly faulty, pre-owned
2012 Rolls-Royce Ghost EW. Defendant Rolls-Royce advertises a
certified pre-owned promise for selected pre-owned vehicles,
referred to as Provenance collection, on its website. The
Provenance promise includes Defendant Rolls-Royce's
guaranty to “thoroughly check the motor car's
history and mileage, to ensure its integrity.”
Defendant Towbin identifies as a certified dealer of
Defendant Rolls-Royce's vehicles.
Khorasani (a nonparty but a member of Plaintiff Wynn
Holdings, LLC) purchased the vehicle from Defendant Towbin on
June 6, 2015. The vehicle was pre-owned. But at the time
Khorasani purchased the vehicle, the vehicle fell under the
original new vehicle warranty.
July 2015 to October 2016, Paul Edalat (a nonparty but also a
member of Plaintiff Wynn Holdings, LLC) took the vehicle in
for service, maintenance, and repairs to either Rolls-Royce
of Orange County or to Defendant Towbin. The vehicle was
unavailable to Plaintiff for over one hundred days, combined,
during this time due to necessary repairs.
December 30, 2015, after the vehicle had been repaired
multiple times for issues related to shaking during
acceleration, Edalat contacted Laura Vaughan at Defendant
Rolls-Royce. After Vaughan confirmed the current registration
of the vehicle was not in Khorasani's name, Vaughan
continued to correspond with Edalat regarding repairs over
the next six months. Edalat informed Vaughan of the multiple
repairs required due to the vehicle shaking during
acceleration. He also reported to her that the shaking
“still exists” and further repair was required.
within the first year of the purchase, Jenevieve Aldivar from
Rolls-Royce of Orange County informed Edalat that the vehicle
had previously been in an accident. This was the first time
Edalat was informed of the accident history. Khorasani then
emailed Defendant Towbin to obtain the documentation from the
prior accident. Defendant Towbin denied the request.
the first year of service and through July 2016, Edalat
continued to communicate with Vaughan. He brought the vehicle
in for the last service and repair attempted under the
warranty on July 9, 2016, which lasted until August 12, 2016.
Edalat continued to communicate with Saldivar during this
time. He also exchanged text messages with an advisor by the
last name of Garrison. Garrison informed Edalat that
Defendant Towbin performed significant engine and
transmission repairs during the last service conducted under
October 30, 2016, the original new vehicle warranty expired.
Plaintiff then sued Defendants on December 16, 2016.
parties dispute whether: Khorasani purchased the vehicle as
an agent for Plaintiff or as an individual; Defendant Towbin
sold the vehicle as a certified pre-owned vehicle rather than
merely a used vehicle; Defendants intentionally failed to
notify Plaintiff or Khorasani of the extensive history of
accidents and repairs connected with the vehicle; Defendant