Court Opinion

ID: 9507287
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:21:06.034118+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:17.753631
License: Public Domain

*291MR. JUSTICE MORRISON
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.
A review of the District Court file, and particularly the findings of fact entered by the District Court, fail to disclose that the counter-claim was treated. The District Court did, in a conclusion of law, deny defendant’s counterclaim. However, this is insufficient.
In defendant’s counterclaim, defendant alleges that the vehicle was defective and that defendant incurred damages as the result of being without the service of the vehicle for prolonged periods of time. Defendant alleges that the defects resulted in continuous repair attempts with resulting cost for replacement vehicles.
In reviewing this record I am unable to determine the basis for the District Court’s resolution of this issue. The District Court failed to make any findings of fact with respect to defendant’s allegation of defects.
I would remand to the District Court with direction to make specific findings of fact on defendant’s counterclaim so that this Court would have an adequate opportunity to review those issues.