On February 28, 2005, David Dobrovolny purchased a 2005 F-350 pickup truck which had been manufactured by Ford Motor Co. The truck caught fire in Dobrovolny's driveway on April 16, 2006. No one was physically injured, and no property other than the truck was damaged. The truck was completely destroyed. Dobrovolny filed suit against Ford on May 20, 2009. In his complaint, Dobrovolny alleged that the defective nature of the truck caused it to catch fire. He pleaded three alternative claims-breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, negligence, and strict liability-in an effort to recover damages for the loss he sustained as a result of purchasing a defective truck. Ford filed a motion to dismiss each of the claims. On what basis would Ford have argued that the breach of implied warranty of merchantability claim should be dismissed? On what basis would Ford have argued that the negligence and strict liability claims should be dismissed? How did the court rule on Ford's motion to dismiss?

  • CreatedJuly 16, 2014
  • Files Included
Post your question