Court Opinion

ID: 9855265
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:22:03.471076+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:25:27.344242
License: Public Domain

LOUIS J. CECI, J.
(dissenting). I dissent and would award the petitioner actual and proper attorney's fees under sec. 218.17(3), Stats., because Steenberg violated a provision of subch. VI of ch. 218, Stats. Steen-berg's failure to bring the mobile home into compliance with the warranty, after numerous attempts failed to do so, violated sec. 218.14(1)(c)2, Stats. Contrary to the majority's characterization of this action, the petitioner did not bring this action based upon a simple breach of warranty, by which I mean the sale of a nonconforming unit. Rather, the petitioner brought this action based upon the failure of Steenberg's repairs to bring the mobile home into compliance with the warranty. This distinction is crucial because it is the failure of the repairs to bring the mobile home into conformity with the warranty, not the need for the repairs, that violates *621sec. 218.14(l)(c)2. Accordingly, I would reverse the decision of the court of appeals.