Connor v. Bogrett
Wyoming Supreme Court
596 P.2d 683 (1979)
- Written by Kyli Cotten, JD
Facts
William Connor (plaintiff) was an experienced owner of labrador retrievers and used them to compete in field competitions for bird hunting. Connor became interested in purchasing a black labrador retriever from Jere Bogrett (defendant). Connor had the dog checked out by his veterinarian, who stated that the animal had hip dysplasia, which could develop into osteoarthritis and preclude the dog from being able to compete. Connor and Bogrett discussed the diagnosis and the success of other hunting dogs with the condition. Ultimately, Connor purchased the dog for $8,000, with $6,000 to be paid at the time of the purchase, and the remaining $2,000 to be paid approximately 10 months thereafter. Several months later, the dog demonstrated difficulty with performing in field competitions. Connor took the dog back to the veterinarian, who confirmed that x-rays revealed osteoarthritis. Connor requested a rescission of the sales contract from Bogrett, who refused. Connor subsequently abandoned the dog at Bogrett’s property and filed suit seeking rescission of the contract. Bogrett filed a counterclaim for the $2,000 balance and the cost of caring for the dog. The district court found that Connor had accepted the dog and thus had no right to revoke the contract. On appeal, Connor asserted that the continued physical ability of the dog to compete in field competitions was an express warranty by Bogrett under the Uniform Commercial Code. Thus, Connor asserted that he was entitled to return the dog and rescind the contract upon learning that it had osteoarthritis.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.