Legal Opinion
Chmill v. Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided April 28, 1988No. 86-1975PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSundby, J.
This case requires an interpretation of sec. 218.015, Stats. (1983-84), Wisconsin’s Lemon Law. Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville, Inc., and Ford Motor Company appeal a judgment under the law requiring them to replace the Chmills’ Ford Tempo with a comparable new motor vehicle. We affirm.
HH
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
On November 26, 1983, the Chmills purchased a demonstrator 1984 Ford Tempo, from Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville, Inc. Friendly Ford gave the Chmills a new-car warranty which expired May 4, 1984 when the Chmills had driven the vehicle 12,000 miles.
The trial court found that…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Murray v. Holiday Rambler, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Wassenaar v. PanosWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Watkins v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. ZielkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Oregel v. AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Harold L. Bushendorf v. Freightliner CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Olen v. PhelpsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1996
- Chmill v. Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
- Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.