expand icon
book Business Law 11th Edition by Kenneth Clarkson,Roger LeRoy Miller,Gaylord Jentz,Frank Cross cover

Business Law 11th Edition by Kenneth Clarkson,Roger LeRoy Miller,Gaylord Jentz,Frank Cross

النسخة 11الرقم المعياري الدولي: 978-0324655223
book Business Law 11th Edition by Kenneth Clarkson,Roger LeRoy Miller,Gaylord Jentz,Frank Cross cover

Business Law 11th Edition by Kenneth Clarkson,Roger LeRoy Miller,Gaylord Jentz,Frank Cross

النسخة 11الرقم المعياري الدولي: 978-0324655223
تمرين 16
Jauregui v. Bobb's Piano Sales Service, Inc.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, 2006. 922 So.2d 303.
• Background and Facts In November 2001, Jorge Jauregui contracted to buy a Kawai RX5 piano (Serial No. 2392719a) for $24,282 from Bobb's Piano Sales and Service, Inc., in Miami, Florida. The piano was represented to be in new condition and to qualify for the manufacturer's "new piano" warranty. Bobb's did not mention that the piano had been in storage for almost a year and had been moved at least six times. The piano was delivered with "unacceptable damage," according to Jauregui, who videotaped its condition. He sent a letter of complaint to the state department of consumer services, identifying at least four "necessary repairs." He then filed a suit in a Florida state court against Bobb's, claiming breach of contract. Bobb's admitted that the piano needed repair. The court concluded that Bobb's was in breach of the parties' contract and that specific performance was not possible, but ruled that Jauregui "takes nothing in damages." Jauregui appealed to a state intermediate appellate court.
SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
* * * *
* * * [T]he judgment on review was erroneous as a matter of law. It is based on the rationale that because, even in its defective condition, the piano was worth as much or more than plaintiff actually paid, no actionable damages had been sustained for breach of the contract for purchase and sale. It is the law, however,* * * that, in a case such as this one, the purchaser of non-conforming goods like the offending piano retains the option to claim either the difference in value or, as plaintiff clearly did in this case, in effect, to cancel the deal and get his money back. This principle is based on the common sense idea that the purchaser is entitled to receive what he wanted to buy and pay for and that the seller is not free to supply any nonconforming item she wishes just so long as the deviant goods are worth just as much. * * * [Emphasis added.]
Accordingly, the judgment under review is reversed and the cause remanded with directions and for further proceedings consistent herewith * * *.
• Decision and Remedy The state intermediate appellate court agreed with the lower court's conclusion that the defendant had breached the parties' contract but disagreed with the ruling that the plaintiff should not obtain damages. The appellate court awarded Jauregui the contract price with interest and other amounts. The court also ordered Bobb's to remove the piano.
• What If the Facts Were Different If Bobb's had delivered the piano in new condition and Jauregui had refused to pay for it only out of "buyer's remorse," how might the outcome in this case have been different
• The Legal Environment Dimension What might a buyer who prevails in a dispute such as the one in this case be awarded in addition to the contract price with interest
التوضيح
موثّق
like image
like image

Buyer's remorse
Buyer's remorse basical...

close menu
Business Law 11th Edition by Kenneth Clarkson,Roger LeRoy Miller,Gaylord Jentz,Frank Cross
cross icon