Brian Felley went to the home of Thomas and Cheryl Singleton to look at a used car that the Singletons had offered for sale. The car, a six-year-old Ford Taurus, had approximately 126,000 miles on it. Felley testdrove the car and discussed its condition with the Singletons. The Singletons told him that the car was in "good mechanical condition" and that they had experienced no brake problems. This was a primary consideration for Felley, who purchased the car from the Singletons for $5,800. Felley soon began experiencing problems with the car. On the second day after he bought it, he noticed a problem with the clutch. Over the next few days, the clutch problem worsened to the point where he was unable to shift the gears, no matter how far he pushed in the clutch pedal. He had to pay $942.76 for the removal and repair of the clutch.
Within the first month that Felley owned the car, it developed serious brake problems, the repairs of which cost Felley more than $1,400. Felley brought a small claims action against the Singletons, claiming that they had made and breached an express warranty to him. At trial, an expert witness testified that based on his examination of the car and discussion with Felley about the car and other factors, it was his opinion that the car's brake and clutch problems probably existed when Felley bought the car. The trial court ruled in Felley's favor and ordered the Singletons to pay him $2,343.03. On appeal, the Singletons argued that what they said to Felley about the car did not constitute an express warranty and that they therefore should not have been held liable. Were they correct?

  • CreatedJuly 16, 2014
  • Files Included
Post your question