Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Jorgensen v. Pressnall

Oregon Supreme Court
545 P.2d 1382 (1976)


Facts

Gordon and Kathryn Jorgensen (plaintiffs) purchased a mobile home from Ronald Pressnall (defendant). Pressnall had told the Jorgensens that the mobile home was of “good, sound construction,” and that any factory defects would be promptly repaired. The Jorgensens paid a down payment and signed a financing agreement with Pressnall. Pressnall assigned the finance contract to Commercial Credit Company (Commercial Credit) (defendant). When Pressnall assigned the finance contract, Pressnall warranted that the contract would be enforceable against the Jorgensens. When the Jorgensens moved in, they discovered that the mobile home had serious structural defects, including cracks in the walls and plumbing leaks. The Jorgensens notified Pressnall of the defects, and Pressnall said the defects would be fixed. Pressnall sent handymen to the Jorgensens’ home, but the handymen failed to make adequate repairs. After about two months, the Jorgensens rejected Pressnall’s further attempts to repair the mobile home. The Jorgensens returned the mobile home and notified Pressnall and Commercial Credit that the Jorgensens were rescinding or undoing the sales contract. Commercial Credit repossessed and sold the mobile home at a loss. The Jorgensens sued Pressnall and Commercial Credit for rescission, the return of their down payment, and consequential damages. Commercial Credit asserted a crossclaim against Pressnall for damages. The trial court entered judgment against Pressnall on both the Jorgensens’ rescission claim and Commercial Credit’s damages claim. Pressnall appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (O’Connell, C. J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.