Kasselder v. Kapperman
South Dakota Supreme Court
316 N.W.2d 628 (1982)
- Written by Jose Espejo , JD
Facts
Jerome Kapperman (defendant) owned a road grader with a defective engine. James Schladweiler (defendant) offered to purchase the grader from Kapperman for $8,500 if the grader was in running condition. Kapperman agreed to pay up to $3,000 to have the grader repaired. Schladweiler said he could have the grader repaired for less by Alice and Gene Kasselder, doing business as A & G Diesel Truck Repair (Truck Repair) (plaintiff). Kapperman shipped the grader to Schladweiler for repairs. Truck Repair’s mechanics discovered the grader was not repairable. Truck Repair located a used engine and informed Schladweiler that it would cost $2,300 to purchase and repair the engine. Schladweiler informed Kapperman, and Kapperman told Schladweiler he would not pay more than $3,000 to repair the engine. At no point did Truck Repair speak to Kapperman or have reason to believe that Schladweiler was Kapperman’s agent. Later, Truck Repair informed Schladweiler the estimate would in fact be $5,000, due to a cracked cylinder head. Schladweiler approved the repairs without informing Kapperman of the increased repair cost. Schladweiler periodically followed the progress of the repairs with Truck Repair. The total cost of repairs was $6,441.06. Neither Kapperman nor Schladweiler paid the bill. Truck Repair sued Kapperman and Schladweiler. The trial court found for Truck Repair and entered an order and judgment against Schladweiler for $3,441.06 plus interest and against Kapperman for $3,000 plus interest. Schladweiler appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dunn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 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.