Legal Opinion
Reeves v. Morelli-Hoskins Ford, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 16, 1992No. 1789PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BECK, Judge:
The issue is whether under the Lemon Law the manufacturer of an allegedly defective car has a duty to refund the full purchase price to the buyer of the car where the car has been repossessed by the bank that financed the purchase of the car as a result of the buyer’s failure to make installment payments.
Appellant Curtis W. Reeves initiated this action against appellees, retailer Morelli-Hoskins Ford, Inc. and manufacturer Ford Motor Company, asserting that he is due a refund under the Pennsylvania Automobile Lemon Law (the “Lemon Law”), 73 P.S. § 1951 et seq. The trial court…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thompson Coal Co. v. Pike Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Pennsylvania Gas & Water Co. v. Nenna & Frain, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Mentzer v. OgnibeneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Fox v. GablerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. DunsmoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- King v. King Motor Co. of Fort LauderdaleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
- Singer v. Land Rover North America, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1997
- Kruger v. Subaru of America, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
- Butterfield v. Meadville Medical Center, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Crawford County1996
- Chapman v. Schutz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Crawford County1996
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.