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

P purchased a color TV from D. the sales ticket guaranteed 90 days free service. When the set was delivered on November 4th it was turned on, it did not function properly because the picture has a reddish tinge. The delivery guy said a service representative would call to adjust the set. P unplugged the set and did not use it. On November 8th, a service representative arrived, and after spending an hour in an effort to eliminate the red cast from the picture advised he would have to remove the guts and repair it back at the business location. P advised that she did not want it repaired but replaced and later demanded a full refund. D refused to refund the purchase price but renewed his offer to adjust, repair, or, if the set could not be made to function properly, to replace it. P sued D seeking a refund of the purchase price. The court ordered rescission, and D appealed. D argues that he was always willing to comply with the terms of the sale either by correcting the malfunction by minor repairs or, in the event the set could not be made thereby properly operative, by replacement; that as he was denied the opportunity to try to correct the difficulty, he did not breach the contract of sale or any warranty thereunder, expressed or implied.

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

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

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