Irmscher Suppliers, Inc. v. Schuler
Indiana Court of Appeals
909 N.E.2d 1040 (2009)

- Written by Douglas Halasz, JD
Facts
In August 2000, the Schulers (plaintiffs) remodeled their home. The Schulers paid $12,986.13 for assorted windows manufactured by Pella from Irmscher Suppliers, Inc. (Irmscher). Twelve of the windows were fixed and did not open. Twenty-two of the windows were hinged and did open. The hinged windows had screens to prevent insects from entering the home. The Schulers chose this combination of windows after consulting with an Irmscher salesperson. The hinged windows had a single price for the windows and the screens. In 2001, the number of insects in the Schulers’ home increased drastically. The Schulers spent a lot of time killing and cleaning up after the insects to protect their children. The problem persisted despite Irmscher’s attempts to fix the screens. Pella ultimately determined that the screens were defectively designed. In March 2004, Irmscher and Pella offered to replace the screens with different screens for free, but the Schulers declined. Thereafter, the Schulers sued Irmscher and Pella (defendants) for breach of implied warranty of merchantability. In 2008, the trial court ruled in the Schulers’ favor and awarded the Schulers $47,827.85 total in direct and consequential damages, which was comprised of $8,428 for their time spent killing and cleaning up after the insects and $39,399.85 to replace all the windows with double-hung windows, inclusive of $10,000 to replace the vinyl siding on the home. Irmscher and Pella appealed the damages award.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Vaidik, 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.