Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

03/24/76 CARTMELL v. SLAVIK COMPANY

March 24, 1976

CARTMELL
v.
THE SLAVIK COMPANY



Appeal from Washtenaw, William F. Ager, Jr., J.

Leave to appeal denied, 397 Mich 828.

McGregor, P. J., and T. M. Burns and N. J. Kaufman, JJ. McGregor, P. J. concurred. N. J. Kaufman, J. (dissenting).

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

Opinion of the Court

1. Contracts -- Breach of Warranty -- Discovery of Breach -- Accrual of Claim -- Limitation of Actions -- Statutes.

A claim for breach of warranty accrues when the breach is discovered or reasonably should have been discovered, and the statute of limitations begins to run at that time (MCLA 600.5833; MSA 27A.5833).

2. Products Liability -- Contracts -- Breach of Warranty -- Discovery of Breach -- Question of Fact.

The time at which a breach of warranty is discovered or should reasonably have been discovered is a question for the trier of fact; therefore, the issue of when a plaintiff discovered or should have discovered that leaks in his roof were caused by faulty roof tiles or faulty installation was properly submitted to the jury.

3. Contracts -- Breach of Warranty -- Discovery of Breach -- Question of Fact.

A question of fact arises where there is an issue concerning reasonable diligence in discovering a breach of warranty unless reasonable minds could not differ on the Conclusion.

Dissent by N. J. Kaufman, J.

4. Products Liability -- Contracts -- Breach of Warranty -- Discovery of Breach -- Accrual of Claim -- Limitation of Actions.

Questions regarding reasonableness of notice and the time at which the cause of action accrued, in a breach of warranty case, generally represent conflicts to be decided by the trier of fact; however, no conflict is presented where it is clear that a plaintiff knew of leaks in a new roof and should reasonably have ascertained that the cause was faulty installation, and the statute of limitations should have begun to run from that time ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.