Colonial Dodge, Inc. v. Miller
Michigan Supreme Court
362 N.W.2d 704, 40 U.C.C. Rep. 1 (1984)
- Written by Megan Schwarz, JD
Facts
On April 19, 1976, Clarence Miller (Miller) (defendant) purchased a car from Colonial Dodge, Incorporated (Colonial) (plaintiff). The purchase price included a heavy-duty trailer package with extra wide tires, including a spare tire. On May 28, 1976, Miller picked up the car. Later, after arriving home, Miller discovered that the car did not have a spare tire and the next morning notified Colonial. Colonial informed Miller that Colonial did not have a spare tire available and Miller told Colonial that Miller was stopping payment on the checks tendered for payment and would leave the car in front of Miller’s house for Colonial to pick up. Colonial sued Miller for the purchase price arguing that the failure to include a spare tire did not constitute a substantial impairment in value of the car sufficient to authorize Miller to revoke acceptance of the car. The trial court held for Colonial and the court of appeals affirmed. Miller appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kavanagh, J.)
Dissent (Ryan, J.)
Dissent (Boyle, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
