Haight v. Dale’s Used Cars
Idaho Court of Appeals
87 P.3d 962 (2003)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
G. W. Haight (plaintiff) bought a used Jeep from Dale’s Used Cars, Inc. (Dale’s) (defendant). The vehicle was still covered by the manufacturer’s new-car warranty. Soon after the purchase, a Jeep dealer informed Haight and Dale’s that the vehicle had once been in a collision but that the collision damage could be repaired for $2,800, or about 10 percent of the vehicle’s purchase price. Haight responded to this new information by revoking acceptance of the vehicle and demanding that Dale’s refund Haight’s purchase money, which Dale’s refused to do. Haight sued under Idaho’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The trial court heard conflicting evidence as to whether safety concerns motivated Haight to buy the Jeep. The court found that the $2,800 cost of addressing whatever safety concerns Haight may have had was not enough to substantially impair the Jeep’s value. From this, the court determined that Haight lacked grounds for revoking acceptance of the vehicle and that the revocation was thus ineffective. The court entered judgment for Dale’s, with attorney’s fees. Haight appealed to the Idaho Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Perry, 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. 46,400 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.
