Shuster v. California Auto Dealers Exchange
This case is before us again after we remanded it to the trial court because it had not ruled on all of the grounds raised by plaintiff Elsa S. Shuster in her motion to certify a class action for her complaint for restraint of trade under the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, 16720 & 16726) and by defendants California Auto Dealers Exchange, Inc., California Auto Dealers Exchange, LLC, Manheim Auctions, and Jim DesRochers in their opposition to the motion. (Shuster v. California Auto Dealers Exchange, Inc. (Oct. 26, 2004, G032163) [nonpub. opn.].) Plaintiff argues the trial court erred when it did not allow her to file a new certification motion, including the declaration of an expert, but instead considered only the prior motion. She also claims the court made erroneous legal assumptions and applied improper criteria when it ruled she had not produced sufficient evidence of common proof of damages. Court disagree and affirm.
Comments on Shuster v. California Auto Dealers Exchange