Wimpy Jeep - the Implied Warranty of Fitness for Particular Purpose and Strict Product Liability, Expressed Warranty and Public Policy
Autor: sharpbike • April 19, 2012 • Essay • 472 Words (2 Pages) • 1,508 Views
The Implied Warranty of Fitness for Particular Purpose and Strict product liability, Expressed Warranty and Public policy. Eddie could file for damages and possibly void the contract due the fact the he informed the dealer what he was going to use the Jeep for. Then the dealer researched with the manufacture of the travel trailer. Misrepresentation is another fact in this case. The sales manager made a fraudulent statement when he stated that “this Jeep is powerful enough to do the job”. He is in the business trade and should have known the characteristic of the Jeep to make a factual statement. In 1916 MacPherson sued Buick motor company for a defective wheel. This was a landmark case that has changed over the years to be current with the changing times. Had the Sales manager not called to get the information on the RV then he may not be liable for damages. Then he stated that the Jeep is strong enough to pull the trailer as required so he set himself up again to be held liable. Again you have several options here with the Expressed warranty that this jeep is strong enough that the sales manager stated to Eddie. Art in my opinion would be able to file a claim for injury based on the Privity of contract. Being that he was in the vehicle as a passenger according to the law that states any person who sustains an injury proximately caused by a negligently made product. This is based on the misrepresentation of the sales manager. Don’t think the lemon laws come into play here because it only happened one time and there is not history or problems. The last statement that the sales manager stated was “try the Jeep out” and that if he wasn’t satisfied “come back in and we’ll talk.” That another implied warranty that Eddie could say that I am not satisfied because of the manager’s misrepresentation of the capabilities of the Jeep.
Possible defense for this case is that He was given the opportunity to test the vehicle out prior to going
...