Hobbs v. General Motors Corp.
United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
134 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (2001)
Facts
Amber L. Hobbs and Alex Manci (plaintiffs) purchased Chevrolet Impala SS vehicles (Impalas) manufactured by General Motors Corporation (GM) (defendant) from GM car dealerships. The Impalas had stickers on the windows indicating that the Impalas included a full-size spare tire as part of GM’s standard-vehicle-price options. Moreover, the owner’s manual in the Impalas warned owners not to mix tires of different sizes and included a diagram showing owners how to include the spare tire in the regular tire rotation pattern. However, the spare tires included with the Impalas were two inches smaller than the regular tires on the Impalas and were made by a different manufacturer. Based on the statements in the window stickers and in the owner’s manual, Hobbs and Manci sued GM for breach of warranty. GM moved for summary judgment as to Manci’s breach-of-express-warranty claim and argued that Manci failed to provide timely notice of a breach of express warranty, as required by Alabama’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-607. The complaint filed by Hobbs and Manci contained no allegation that they gave any notice to GM of the breach before filing suit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Albritton, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
