Williams v. Rank & Son Buick, Inc.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentWilkie, J.
At a time when there is so much emphasis on consumer protection, the majority, in effect, revitalizes the old caveat emptor doctrine without specifically mentioning it.
The majority opinion holds that the respondent could not, as a matter of law, have relied on the representation that there was air conditioning in the car since such representation was obviously false.
While the majority concedes that the “statement’s falsity is a question of fact” it states that “this court has decided some such questions as a matter of law.”
The cases cited by the majority to support its conclusion that this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- W. H. Hobbs Supply Co. v. ErnstWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Acme Chair & Metal Crafts Co. v. Northern Corrugating Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Plantikow v. WolkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- Prime Manufacturing Co. v. Allen-Hough Carryola Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933