(1) Existing law makes it a violation of the Vehicle Code for the holder of a vehicle dealer's license to commit specified actions, including, among other things, to advertise for sale, sell, or purchase for resale a new vehicle of a line-make for which the dealer does not hold a franchise. Existing law also lists various exceptions to this requirement. This bill would expand the list of existing exceptions to also include a vehicle acquired in the ordinary course of business as a new vehicle by a dealer franchised to sell that vehicle if specified conditions are met, including if the manufacturer or distributor of the vehicle files a bankruptcy petition. (2) Existing law generally requires a manufacturer, manufacturer branch, remanufacturer, remanufacturer branch, distributor, distributor branch, transporter, or dealer of vehicles to be licensed by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Under existing law, it is unlawful for a manufacturer, manufacturer branch, distributor, or distributor branch to, among other things, dishonor a warranty, rebate, or other incentive offered to the public or a dealer, as specified, or to unfairly discriminate in favor of a dealership owned or controlled, in whole or part, by a manufacturer or an entity that controls or is controlled by a manufacturer or distributor. This bill would prohibit a manufacturer, manufacturer branch, distributor, or distributor branch from preventing, or attempting to prevent, by contract or otherwise, a dealer from acquiring, adding, or maintaining a sales or service operation for another line-make of motor vehicles at the same or expanded facility at which the dealer currently operates a dealership if the dealer complies with any reasonable facilities and capital requirements of the manufacturer or distributor or from requiring a dealer to establish or maintain exclusive facilities, personnel, or display space if the imposition of the requirement would be unreasonable in light of all existing circumstances, including economic conditions. In any proceeding under these provisions in which the reasonableness of a facility requirement is an issue, the manufacturer or distributor would have the burden of proof. The bill would also prohibit additional specified unlawful acts by a manufacturer, manufacturer branch, distributor, or distributor branch against a dealer. (3) Under existing law, a violation of the above provisions relating to occupational licensing and business regulations in the Vehicle Code is a misdemeanor. Because this bill would create a new crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
The Civil Discovery Act permits a party to a civil action to obtain discovery, as specified, by inspecting documents, tangible things, and land or other property in the possession of any other party to the action. Existing law requires the party to whom an inspection demand has been directed to respond separately to each item or category of item by any of certain responses, including a statement that the party will comply with the particular demand for inspection by the date set for inspection pursuant to a specified provision. This bill would establish procedures for a person to obtain discovery of electronically stored information, as defined, in addition to documents, tangible things, and land or other property, in the possession of any other party to the action. This bill would permit discovery by the means of copying, testing, or sampling, in addition to inspection, of documents, tangible things, land or other property, or electronically stored information. The Civil Discovery Act permits the party demanding inspection and the responding party to agree to extend the time for service of a response to a set of inspection demands, or to particular items or categories of items in a set, to a date beyond that provided in a specified provision. This bill would permit the parties to agree to extend the date for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling beyond those provided in specified provisions. The Civil Discovery Act requires any documents produced in response to an inspection demand to be produced as they are kept in the usual course of business, or be organized and labeled to correspond with the categories in the demand. The documents are to be produced on the date described above or as agreed to by the parties pursuant to an extension. This bill would make this provision applicable, in addition, to documents produced in response to a demand for copying, testing, or sampling. The bill would furthermore provide that if a party responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information objects to a specified form for producing the information, or if no form is specified in the demand, the responding party shall state in its response the form in which it intends to produce each type of information. In general if a demand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of electronically stored information, the responding party would be required to produce the information in the form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable, but need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. The bill would also provide that a party seeking a protective order regarding, or a party objecting to or opposing a demand for, production, inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of electronically stored information, on the basis that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of the undue burden or expense shall bear the burden of demonstrating that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense. If it is established that the electronically stored information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense, the court may nonetheless order discovery if the demanding party shows good cause, subject to specified restrictions in specified circumstances. Existing law requires the court to impose a monetary sanction, as specified, against any party or any attorney of a party for specified violations. This bill would generally provide that, notwithstanding the above provision, the court shall not impose sanctions on a party or any attorney of a party for failure to provide electronically stored information that has been lost, damaged, altered, or overwritten as the result of the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
This measure would recognize California as the leading high technology center in the United States and would declare that it shall remain the leading high technology center in the United States. The measure would also declare the 2nd week of May, annually, as California High Technology Week.
This measure would declare June 2009 as Scleroderma Awareness Month.
This measure would declare May 2009 to be "Senior Volunteer Month" to honor the contributions of California's senior volunteers.
This measure would designate Friday, May 8, 2009, as California Peace Officers' Memorial Day and would urge all Californians to use that day to honor California peace officers.
This measure would proclaim April 4, 2009, as DMV/Donate Life California Day and the month of April 2009 as DMV/Donate Life California Month. This measure would encourage all Californians to sign up with the Donate Life California Organ and Tissue Donor Registry.