Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

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.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.