Yates v. Clifford Motors, Inc.
Pennsylvania Superior Court
423 A.2d 1262 (1980)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Walter Yates (plaintiff) test-drove a truck being sold by Clifford Motors, Inc. (Clifford) (defendant). After discussing a vibration with Clifford’s salesperson, Yates agreed to purchase the truck for $2,000 and his car’s trade-in value. The next day, Yates detected a door defect that the salesman said would be repaired. When Yates returned, the door was still defective and the finish marred. Yates was told repairs would be made but the shop was closed and Yates should take delivery. Thereafter, Yates experienced numerous problems and took the truck back multiple times. Yates notified the financing bank he would not make payments until repairs were done. Four months after delivery, Yates filed a complaint in assumpsit against Clifford. Clifford repossessed the truck two months later. The court found for Yates. On appeal, Clifford argued Yates accepted the truck because any rejection occurred after an unreasonable time, Yates did not notify Clifford of the rejection or return the truck, Yates traveled 9,000 miles while possessing the truck, and the truck’s defects were too insubstantial to justify rejection.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Price, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 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.
