In the text case,Lucy Mydlach v.DaimlerChrysler Corp,the questions at issue were whether the plaintiff could bring a revocation of acceptance claim against a vehicle manufacturer,and when the statute of limitations began to run under the Magnuson-Moss Act.Which of the following was the result on appeal?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)The state supreme court found that the car buyer could bring a
breach-of-written-warranty claim under the Magnuson-Moss Act because the limitations period began to run not when the car was bought but when the repairs under the warranty were not properly made.However,the car buyer could not bring a revocation of acceptance claim because revocation of acceptance was unavailable under Illinois law against a car manufacturer that was not a party to the sales contract.
B)The state supreme court found that the car buyer could bring a
breach-of-written-warranty claim under the Magnuson-Moss Act because the limitations period began to run not when the car was bought but when the repairs under the warranty were not properly made.However,the car buyer could not bring a revocation of acceptance claim because revocation of acceptance was unavailable under Illinois law against a car manufacturer that was not a party to the sales contract.
C)The state supreme court found that the car buyer could bring a
breach-of-written-warranty claim under the Magnuson-Moss Act because the limitations period began to run not when the car was bought but when the repairs under the warranty were not properly made.However,the car buyer could not bring a revocation of acceptance claim because revocation of acceptance was unavailable under Illinois law against a car manufacturer that was not a party to the sales contract.
D)The state supreme court found that the car buyer could bring a
breach-of-written-warranty claim under the Magnuson-Moss Act because the limitations period began to run not when the car was bought but when the repairs under the warranty were not properly made.However,the car buyer could not bring a revocation of acceptance claim because revocation of acceptance was unavailable under Illinois law against a car manufacturer that was not a party to the sales contract.

In the Text Case,Lucy Mydlach V