Ismael v. Goodman Toyota
North Carolina Court of Appeals
417 S.E.2d 290 (1992)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
Khalid Ismael (plaintiff) purchased a used Ford Tempo from Goodman Toyota (Goodman) (defendant) for $5,054. Ismael bought the car as is. However, Ismael also paid an extra $695 for a Vehicle Service Agreement that covered repairs to the car for 24 months or 24,000 miles after purchase. Ismael immediately found that the car had many serious problems. Ismael returned it to Goodman several times for repair, and Goodman did not charge Ismael. However, Goodman was unable to resolve the car’s malfunctions. Ismael finally took the car to other Ford dealers, and learned that sludge in the car’s engine made it unrepairable. Ismael sued Goodman, alleging that Goodman had violated its implied warranty of merchantability when it sold him an undrivable car. Goodman argued that because the car was sold as is, pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), Goodman effectively disclaimed all implied warranties. The trial court ruled in favor of Goodman. On appeal, Ismael argued that he was entitled to relief because Goodman had failed to comply with the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wells, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
