BETACO, INC. V. CESSNA AIRCRAFT CO.
32 F.3d 1126 (7th Cir. 1994)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over the refunds of a deposit.
FACTS: Betaco (P) put a down payment on a new jet with Cessna (D) on the basis that the
new jet would be faster, more efficient, and have more range than the jet they currently
owned. P got a brochure and a sales letter from D proclaiming the new jet's attributes. P
signed a purchase agreement that contained a read and understand clause and a detailed
explanation of warranties/ P paid $150,000 and then discovered that the new jet would not
have a greater range and decided to cancel the order. D refused to return the deposit. P
sued in diversity for an express breach of warranty. The court ruled against D's claim that
the purchase agreement was a fully integrated document. P got to enter cover letter
representations of the jets range. P eventually got the jury verdict under the express
warranty theory and got the judgment. D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment