Opinion ID: 1187902
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Trial Court's Instructions on the Burden of Proof.

Text: The trial court did not err in failing to give the jury an instruction on Waldock's burden of proof. Whether Waldock presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case is a question of law. See IX J. Wigmore, Evidence § 2487, at 293 (Chadbourn rev. ed. 1981). If he established a prima facie case, the burden of proof appropriately shifted to Universal to prove consumer abuse. Waldock presented an assortment of experts providing credible evidence that the engine failed due to a timing chain tensioner. To put a more onerous burden of proof on Waldock would destroy the remedial intent of the Magnuson-Moss Act. Waldock established a prima facie case of breach of warranty. The subsequent jury instructions were correct.