Opinion ID: 50921
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Warranty Protections for Used Vehicles

Text: Finally, jurisdictions vary in regard to whether an implied warranty extends from a remote manufacturer to a purchaser of -29- used goods. Compare Gen. Motors Corp. v. Halco Instruments, Inc., 185 S.E.2d 619, 622 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971) (holding that purchaser of used goods has no implied warranty claim against manufacturer), with Int’l Petroleum Servs., Inc. v. S & N Well Serv., Inc., 639 P.2d 29, 34 (Kan. 1982) (stating that the extent of the implied warranty obligation in transactions involving used goods depends on the circumstances of the transactions). The class of plaintiffs here is composed of purchasers of both new and used cars. Plaintiffs again failed to analyze the impact of these variations in state law on the legal standards class members would be held to, the jury instructions, and trial management, (i.e., how the trial would be affected by the possible need to conduct individualized inquiries into whether class members bought used versus new cars).