Malkamaki v. Sea Ray Boats, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to create a question of fact regarding notice to the defendant through its authorized dealer or repair facility
• stating that “[f]ailure to cure defects under warranty within a reasonable time sup ports a finding that a remedy failed of its essential purpose”
• “If, after repeated repairs, a vehicle fails ‘to operate as should a new vehicle,’ the repair remedy fails of its essential purpose.”
• “Magnuson-Moss sets forth a minimum of two attempts by the warrantor to cure a defect as satisfying the reasonableness requirement.”
• a seller is afforded a minimum of two attempts to cure a defect under the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act
• CSPA’s use of the word “may” means the “award is discretionary, not automatic.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).