Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D, because of typographical and proofreading errors made by a local newspaper, D listed a price for a used automobile that was significantly less than the intended sales price. P attempted to purchase it by tendering the advertised price. The salesperson immediately stated, 'That's a mistake.' The mistake resulted from typographical and proofreading errors made by the newspaper. No employee of D reviewed a proof sheet of the revised Daily Pilot advertisement before it was published, and D was unaware of the mistake until P attempted to purchase the automobile. D refused to honor the price, and P brought this action for breach of contract. The court entered judgment for D on the ground that the mistake in the advertisement precluded the existence of a contract. The appellate court reversed, relying in part upon Vehicle Code section 11713.1, subdivision (e), which makes it unlawful for an automobile dealer not to sell a motor vehicle at the advertised price while the vehicle remains unsold and before the advertisement expires. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co