Our client, Mr. MerrilSimns, is being sued by Tom Kells for breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a par¬ticular purpose in the case of Kells v. Simns. Mr. Simns placed an ad in the Daily Post offering to sell a Ryder 1000 riding lawn mower for $400. Mr. Kells responded to the ad and came to Mr. Simns’s house to purchase the mower. Mr. Kells told Mr. Simns that he needed a good riding mower because he had two and one-half acres that had to be mowed once a week. Mr. Simns responded that, although he had never needed to mow more than an acre, the mower had always done a good job for him. After discussing the terms, Mr. Kells purchased the mower for $300.
One week later, Mr. Kells called Mr. Simns and informed him that the mower was too small and underpowered for his needs, and he wanted his money back Mr. Simns refused, and Mr. Kells has filed suit in small claims court, claiming breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Mr. Simns’s only experi¬ence with riding mowers is based on his use of the Ryder 1000. He does not have any special expertise concerning riding mowers.
Please assess the likelihood of Mr. Kells prevailing on an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose claim.
Statutory Law: ORS 72.3150, Implied warranty: fitness for a particular purpose (state of Oregon), provides: “Where the seller at the time of contracting has reason to know any particular purpose for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is unless excluded or modified under ORS 72.3610 an implied warranty that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.”
Case Law: Beam v. Cullett, 48 Or. App. 47, 615 P.2d 1196 (1980) (see Appendix A).
