Deere & Co. v. Johnson
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
271 F.3d 613 (2001)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
In 1994, Edward Johnson (defendant) purchased a combine from Parker Tractor & Implement (Parker), a retailer for the combine’s manufacturer, Deere & Co. (Deere) (plaintiff). Johnson made a down payment of about $30,000 and financed the remaining purchase price with Deere, which held a security interest in the combine. Johnson used the combine for harvesting crops on his farm, but the combine did not operate properly, even after multiple service calls. In March 1995, Johnson sent a letter to Deere revoking his acceptance of the combine, tendering the combine, and asking for a replacement. Deere refused to take back the combine. Johnson continued using the combine in 1995 and 1996 without making any further loan payments. Deere later recovered the combine and resold it. Deere sued Johnson to collect outstanding loan payments. Johnson counterclaimed, alleging breach of warranty. The jury found for Johnson on the warranty claim and against Deere on the contract claim. The jury implicitly found that Johnson had effectively revoked his acceptance of the combine. In post-judgment motion practice, the trial court denied entry of judgment as a matter of law for Deere on its contract claim but allowed Deere to amend its pleadings to state a new claim against Johnson in quantum meruit. The court then entered a judgment that netted Deere about $35,000, representing a $70,000 rental value for the combine less Johnson’s down payment and prejudgment interest. Both parties appealed. Deere claimed on appeal that the court should have granted judgment as a matter of law to Deere because Johnson’s conduct waived his revocation of acceptance.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jolly, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.