Opinion ID: 2229760
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Manufacturer's Warranty

Text: Hallam next claims that the trial court erred in considering Lange's `manufacturer's warranty' defense and evidence of a design defect in the failed bins. The trial court correctly noted in its order that except for Hallam's second cause of action in its counterclaim, no issues related to warranties of any kind were raised in this case. Hallam's second cause of action claimed that Lange had given Hallam a warranty that the facility would move 7,000 b.p.h. and that Lange had breached that warranty. Hallam's second cause of action had nothing to do with a warranty extended by Lange from the manufacturer on the bins that ruptured. Nowhere in the pleadings did Lange raise a manufacturer's warranty defense. Moreover, Lange presented at trial an expert witness who testified that the two bins ruptured because of defects in their design. Hallam's assignment of error misstates what Lange argued and what the trial court actually considered regarding the cause of the bins' rupturing. In defending against Hallam's counterclaim that Lange constructed the two bins improperly, it was appropriate for Lange to present and for the trial court to consider evidence that something other than Lange's workmanship caused the bins to rupture.