Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Brown v. General Motors Corp.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 16, 2009No. 1061660Published

1ConcurrenceSmith, Justice

I concur in part and concur in the result. The provision at issue in this case does not warrant that there are no defects in the quality of the vehicle; instead, it expresses a promise to repair defects that may have existed at the time of delivery but that are not found until some time during the “warranty period.”

The applicable provision states as follows: “Repairs Covered: The warranty covers repairs to correct any vehicle defect related to materials or workmanship occurring during the warranty period....” A “defect” is a “shortcoming” or “an imperfection that impairs worth or utility.”…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Palm Harbor Homes, Inc. v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1997
  2. Enterprise-Laredo Associates v. Hachar's, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1992
  3. Rhodes v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  4. Tittle v. Steel City Oldsmobile GMC Truck, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1989
  5. Hughes v. Hertz Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API