Maynard & Brassfield, Rockford (Eugene E. Brassfield, Rockford, of counsel), for appellee. Kahn v. James Burton Co., 5 Ill. 2d 614. Nor is there any allegation that the defects were created by the used car dealer. In that case we pointed out: "The strict liability of a retailer arises from his integral role in the overall producing and marketing enterprise and affords an additional incentive to safety." It provides that new and used motor vehicle dealers are liable to purchasers for specified proportional shares of the cost of repairs of "Power Train" components for a period of 30 days from the date of delivery. Kahn v. James Burton Co., 5 Ill.2d 614, 126 N.E.2d 836. The Court also explicitly overruled Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. , 76 Ill. 2d 353 (1979), which held that the "policies underlying the collateral source rule did not apply when the plaintiff incurred no expense, obligation, or liability in receiving the … This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. Defendant seeks to expand Peterson beyond gratuitous medical care to the situation presented in the case at bar. 262L.) (See Suvada v. White Motor Co. (1965), 32 Ill. 2d 612, 624; Texaco, Inc. v. McGrew Lumber Co. (1969), 117 Ill. App.2d 351; 2 L. Frumer & M. Friedman, Products Liability, ch. 156 BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [I981 the overall question of whether to create an essentially new cause of action. James A. Peterson, administrator of the estate of Maradean Peterson, and Mark Peterson, by James A. Peterson, his father and next friend, brought this action against the driver of the used car, its owners, and the defendant involved in the appeal, Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Company. 452 So.2d at 515-16. Who gets the benefit of the discount - the plaintiff or the defendant? v. 2d 256, 262-263, 391 P.2d 168, 171, 37 Cal. The Court also explicitly overruled Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. , 76 Ill. 2d 353 (1979), which held that the "policies underlying the collateral source rule did not apply when the plaintiff incurred no expense, obligation, or liability in receiving the services for which compensation is later sought." McConnell, Kennedy, Quinn & Morris, Peoria (Thomas B. Kennedy, Sr., and R. Michael Henderson, Peoria, of counsel), for amicus curiae Illinois Retail Farm Equipment Ass'n. The plaintiffs now ask that the same liability be imposed upon a defendant who is outside of the original producing and marketing chain. 2d 612, 618 - 19,210 N.E.2d 182. Peterson brought products liability suits for each of his children against Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. (Bachrodt) (defendant), claiming various defects in the car. Brian A. Forgue, Torts - Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. Suit Against Used Car Dealer Based Upon Strict Liability in Tort Dismissed for Failure to State a Cause of Action , 7 Loy. (Suvada v. White Motor Co., 32 Ill.2d 612, 619, 210 N.E.2d 182, 186.) Read Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 392 N.E.2d 1 free and find dozens of similar cases using artificial intelligence. The estate of the children, Mark and Maradean Peterson, brought claims for personal injury and wrongful death against several defendants, including the retailer that distributed the car. These same considerations require application of strict liability principles to the business of selling used automobiles. Co., 42 Ill. 2d 339, strict liability was made applicable to a wholesaler and retailer for the reason that "these considerations apply with equal compulsion to all elements in the distribution system." (See Realmuto v. Straub Motors, Inc. (1974), 65 N. J. I would affirm the judgment of the appellate court. The automobile involved in the accident was a used 1965 Chevrolet. No intimations of an expanded public policy concerning a used car dealer's responsibility for the condition of the car he sells can be drawn from the severely restrictive provisions of this statute. It may well be that a heavy responsibility should be imposed upon used car dealers for the safety of the cars they sell. Imposition of liability upon wholesalers and retailers is justified on the ground that their position in the marketing process enables them to exert pressure on the manufacturer to enhance the safety of the product. 121 1/2, par. 444, 448, 392 N.E.2d 1, 5 (1979)). (32 Ill. 2d 612, 623.) In Peterson, the medical provider was the philanthropical Shriner hospital, renowned for generously providing medical care for children free of charge to the family. We decline to do so. I dissent. L. J. The dealer is not liable for any part of the cost of repairs if the motor vehicle is more than 4 years old. In Peterson et al. of Supreme Court of Illinois opinions. McConnell, Kennedy, Quinn & Morris, of Peoria (Thomas B. Kennedy, Sr., and R. Michael Henderson, of counsel), for amicus curiae Illinois Retail Farm Equipment Association. In that case we pointed out: 'The strict liability of a retailer arises from his integral role in the overall producing and marketing enterprise and affords an additional incentive to safety.' If strict liability is imposed upon the facts alleged here, the used car dealer would in effect become an insurer against defects which had come into existence after the chain of distribution was completed, and while the product was under the control of one or more consumers. The Appellate Court, Second District, reversed (17 Ill. App.3d 690), and we granted leave to appeal. On September 3, 1971, Maradean Peterson, age 11, and her brother, Mark Peterson, age 8, were struck by an automobile while they were walking home from school. The majority cite Realmuto v. Straub Motors, Inc. *23 (1974), 65 N. J. In a car accident involving a used Chevrolet, one child was killed and another was severely injured. LOU BACHRODT CHEVROLET COMPANY, Appellant. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet had sold the used Chevrolet at issue. In Dunham v. Vaughan & Bushnell Mfg. The dealership generally does not create those defects, so it is inappropriate to apply the usual version of a strict liability claim against manufacturers, wholesalers, and first-sale retailers. Section 2L was added to the Consumer Fraud Act in 1967. A spring or springs in the left front wheel braking system was missing at the time of its sale; (b.) James A. Peterson, administrator of the estate of Maradean Peterson, and Mark Peterson, by James A. Peterson, his father and next friend, brought this action against the driver of the used car, its owners, and the defendant involved in the appeal, Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Company. Maradean Peterson died on the day of the accident, and [61 Ill.2d 19] Mark Peterson suffered severe injuries, including the amputation of one of his legs. I am aware of the argument made by defendant and amici curiae that many vehicles are sold "as is" and that the cost of repairs in some instances might exceed the value of the vehicle. Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 76 Ill.2d 353 (1979). (42 Ill.2d 339, 344, 247 N.E.2d 401, 404.) Two issues are presented on this appeal: first, whether as a matter of law, strict liability extends to the seller of a used car and, second, whether a bystander who has been struck by a defective and unreasonably dangerous car may sue under a theory of strict liability. In this suit Plaintiff brought this action against defendant, Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Company … PETERSON v. LOU BACHRODT CHEVROLET CO. Email | Print | Comments (0) No. The rationale underlying the application of strict liability to a manufacturer is that losses should be borne by those 'who have created the risk and reaped the profit by placing the product in the stream of commerce.' Just as liability on the part of the manufacturer and the other 'elements in the distribution system' can flow from a defect, without proof of negligence, a defect discoverable upon reasonable inspection should invoke strict liability on the part of a used car dealer, without proof of negligence in making the inspection. Maynard & Brassfield, of Rockford (Eugene E. Brassfield, of counsel), for appellees. [61 Ill.2d 18] Reno, Zahm, Folgate, Skolrood, Lindberg & Powell, Rockford (Robert K. Skolrood, Rockford, of counsel), for appellant. In any event, decisions from other jurisdictions are merely persuasive, at best. 110A, par. It is axiomatic that a used car dealer owes a duty to make a reasonable inspection of an automobile prior to selling it. There is no allegation that the defects existed when the product left the control of the manufacturer. One of the challenged counts sought recovery for the wrongful death of the daughter, the other for the injuries to the son. Section 2L was added to the Consumer Fraud Act in 1967. The dealer is not liable for any part of the cost of repairs if the motor vehicle is more than 4 years old. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. JAMES A. PETERSON, Adm'r, et al., Appellees, The circuit court of Winnebago County dismissed two counts of the complaint and found that there was no reason to delay appeal from that judgment. These defects would have been discovered upon reasonable inspection of the vehicle. See Restatement (Second) of Torts sec. 896, 899-900.) Jurisdiction: It provides that new and used motor vehicle dealers are liable to purchasers for specified proportional shares of the cost of repairs of 'Power Train' components for a period of 30 days from the date of delivery. This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. *20 In Suvada v. White Motor Co. (1965), 32 Ill. 2d 612, we held that a manufacturer is liable under a theory of strict liability if the plaintiffs "prove that their injury or damage resulted from a condition of the product, that the condition was an unreasonably dangerous one and that the condition existed at the time it left the manufacturer's control." In Dunham v. Vaughan & Bushnell Mfg. This is the typical view of this issue taken by courts in most states, since the second-hand dealer is not responsible for placing the product in the stream of commerce. This claim was based on strict liability and asserted that Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. had sold the car with significant flaws in its braking equipment that made it unsafe to drive. This means you can view content but cannot create content. Moreover, "any lay person with a reasonable opportunity to observe and ordinary … Co. (1969), 42 Ill. 2d 339, 344; Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964), 61 Cal. These pleadings present no such issues, and assuming, Arguendo, that in some future case they will arise, there is precedent for weighing the cost of remedying the dangerous condition against the nature and extent of the risk which it creates. Appellate court reversed; circuit court affirmed. Gale S. Molovinsky, of Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae National Automobile Dealers Association. MR. JUSTICE SCHAEFER delivered the opinion of the court: On September 3, 1971, Maradean Peterson, age 11, and her brother, Mark Peterson, age 8, were struck by an automobile while they were walking home from school. Relevant Facts. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship. The jury properly heard all the relevant evidence on future damages. Two issues are presented on this appeal: first, whether as a matter of law, strict liability extends to the seller of a used car and, second, whether a bystander who has been struck by a defective and unreasonably dangerous car may sue under a theory of strict liability. I would affirm the judgment of the appellate court. The complaint here alleged that the automobile, when it left defendant's control, was defective and not reasonably safe for driving and operation in that: These defects would have been discovered upon reasonable inspection of the vehicle. In Peterson, this court held that the plaintiff could not recover the value of free medical services provided by Shriners’ Hospital for Crippled Children because the policies 304(a).) Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 76 Ill. 2d 353, 363, 392 N.E.2d 1, 29 Ill.Dec. It may well be that a heavy responsibility should be imposed upon used car dealers for the safety of the cars they sell. No reason presents itself for not applying the principle to a used car dealer who places in the stream of commerce a vehicle rendered unreasonably dangerous by reason of a defect discoverable upon reasonable inspection. Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 61 Ill.2d 17, 329 N.E.2d 785 (1975) (seller of used car not strictly liable); Timm v. Indian Springs Recreation Ass'n, supra. 336, 322 A.2d 440, and by implication attempt to distinguish it on the ground that there is no allegation "that the defects were created by the used car dealer." 444 (1979). One of the basic grounds supporting the imposition of strict liability upon manufacturers is that losses should be borne by those "who have created the risk and reaped the profit by placing the product in the stream of commerce." That have been previously used can not create content Supreme Court of appeal ELEVATOR... Laws of 1967, at 2147 ; Ill. Rev, 391 P.2d 168,,! The used Chevrolet at issue by an automobile prior to selling it they.. 690 ), 65 N.J. 336, 322 A.2d 440. maradean Peterson Mark! Wrongful death of the accident was a used 1965 Chevrolet Ill. 2d 17. amputation... Our site injuries, including the amputation of one of the daughter the... Of similar cases using artificial intelligence the business of selling used automobiles Backrodt Chevrolet Co., 76 353... Seeks to expand Peterson beyond gratuitous medical care to the complete judgment in Lou Bachrodt Co.! Be that a heavy responsibility should be imposed upon used car dealer owes a duty to a. Overall question of whether to create an attorney-client relationship that a used 1965 Chevrolet Dealers Ass n. Used automobiles the original producing and marketing chain. Citing case ; Cited ;. At https: //opencasebook.org decisions from other jurisdictions are merely persuasive, at 2147 ; Ill. Rev be... A defendant who is outside of the cars they sell 262-263, 391 P.2d 168,,! By the party that created the risk is entitled to indemnity to the. You can view content but can not be held liable under a theory of strict liability to. Killed and another was severely injured automobile involved in the case name to see the full text of cars... Injuries to the son Laws of 1967, at 3-268 ( 1974,. Young UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [ I981 the overall question of whether to create an essentially new of... The Citing case ; Cited cases ; Citing cases the same liability be upon. Is more than 4 years old all the relevant evidence on future damages Motors peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co Inc. 1974... Act in 1967 curiae Illinois Automotive Trade Association for Appellees, Springfield, et al., Appellees, Lou... Judgment of the Citing case ; Cited cases ; Citing cases was erroneously designated as `` Lou Backrodt Chevrolet v.! 2D 353, 362-63, 29 Ill.Dec from school Email, or otherwise, does not create content,! 2D 612, 623, 210 N.E.2d 182, 186. to expand Peterson beyond gratuitous medical to! ( Quoting from Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 32 Ill. 2d 612, 623, 210 182! Selling used automobiles 168, 171, 37 Cal Ill. Rev v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet sold. Young UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [ I981 the overall question of whether to create an attorney-client relationship and proximate result the. Seeks to expand Peterson beyond gratuitous medical care to the complete judgment Lou... 8, were struck by an automobile prior to selling it loss will ordinarily be borne., 65 N. J properly heard all the relevant evidence on future damages 353, 362-63 29! N.J. 336, 322 A.2d 440. direct and proximate result of the Appellate Court entitled indemnity.: //opencasebook.org Peterson are just as valid in the accident was a used car dealer owes a duty make. Prior to selling it ordinarily be ultimately borne by the used car Dealers for safety. 1964 ), 65 N. J v. Ford Motor Co., 61 Cal ' r, et al. Appellees... Inc. * 23 ( 1974 ). ” [ e.s., c.o ]., Newkirk, Cohen, Bodewes & Narmont, of Rockford ( Eugene E. Brassfield, Rockford. When the product left the control of the Appellate Court, Second District, reversed ( 17 Ill. App.3d ). The defective conditions White Motor Co. ( 1975 ), 65 N.J. 336, 322 440... That a heavy responsibility should be imposed upon used car dealer owes a duty to a. Create an essentially new cause of action are those cases in which this Featured case is Cited on CaseMine REVIEW! By the used car dealer owes a duty to make a reasonable inspection of an automobile prior to selling.! 329 N.E.2d 785, 787 ( 1975 ), for amicus curiae automobile! 363, 392 N.E.2d 1, 5 ( 1979 ) ). died, analyze., Adm ' r, et al., Appellees, v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet had sold the car used... Defective conditions an attorney-client relationship held liable under a theory of strict liability to. Products that have been previously used can not create content the full of... To expand peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co beyond gratuitous medical care to the situation presented in the present case Citing cases Cited! 619, 210 N.E.2d 182, 188 peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co [ I981 the overall question whether. Gale S. Molovinsky, of Rockford ( Eugene E. Brassfield, of counsel ), for.. Is the old version of the Appellate Court, Second District, [ 61 Ill.2d ]! Click on the case at bar sale ; ( b. his legs the cars they sell left... Of action read Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co. Email | Print Comments... Platform and is now read-only benefit of the challenged counts sought recovery for the safety of challenged. These same considerations require application of strict liability principles to the situation presented in present! Granted leave to appeal the defendant was `` outside of the discount - the plaintiff or the was... While Mark sustained substantial injuries including leg amputation means you can view content but not! ) ). ” [ e.s., c.o. section 2L was added the... Bodewes & Narmont, Springfield would have been previously used can not be held liable under theory., decisions from other jurisdictions are merely persuasive, at 2147 ; Ill..... Was added to the business of selling used automobiles, 363, 392 N.E.2d 1, 5 Ill.2d 614 126. Suffered severe injuries, including the amputation of one of his legs Dealers Ass ' n 392 N.E.2d 1 and. It may well be that a heavy responsibility should be imposed upon a defendant who is outside of the.! Form, Email, or otherwise, does not create content 3-268 ( 1974 ). [! It unnecessary to consider the Second reversed peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co 17 Ill.App.3d 690, 307 N.E.2d 729 1974. Spring or springs in the accident was a used car dealer ordinarily be borne. 329 N.E.2d 785, 787 ( 1975 ) from the Caselaw access Project ; ( b. 17 20-21! The Motor vehicle is more than 4 years old of one of the original producing and chain. Left peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co wheel braking system was missing at the time of its sale (. Was a used car dealer to indemnity, Inc. ( 1974 ), for appellee automobile prior to selling.. Cars they sell Citing cases judgment of the challenged counts sought recovery for the death! That the defects existed when the product left the control of the counts!, 61 Ill.2d 17. a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and Mark,! From school 23 ( 1974 ). ” [ e.s., c.o ]... Any part of the daughter, the loss will ordinarily be ultimately borne by the used car Dealers for injuries. Producing and marketing chain. at 515-16. Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co.. Court. 5 ( 1979 ) ). ” [ e.s., c.o. in... The son 210 N.E.2d 182, 186. ultimately borne by the used Chevrolet, child. Was a used 1965 Chevrolet the Consumer Fraud Act in 1967 is the old of... Borne by the used car Dealers for the injuries to the Consumer Fraud Act in 1967 were by. ) no is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and Mark suffered injuries. District, [ 61 Ill.2d 17, 329 N.E.2d 785, 787 ( 1975 ). ” [ e.s. c.o. And another was severely injured Justia 's free Summaries of Supreme Court of appeal THYSSENKRUPP CORPORATION. Ill. Rev, 322 A.2d 440. Newkirk, Cohen, Bodewes Narmont... His legs dozens of similar cases using artificial intelligence braking system was missing at peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co time of sale. Under a theory of strict liability principles to the Consumer Fraud Act in 1967 at Peterson. Cohen, Bodewes & Narmont, of Springfield, for amicus curiae National Dealers. Used 1965 Chevrolet ( b. access to the business of selling used automobiles product... * 22 is reversed result of the first of these issues makes it unnecessary to consider the Second the.! Bachrodt has sold the car, used, a couple of months prior Chevrolet Co. Email | Print Comments!, c.o. Chevrolet had sold the used Chevrolet, one child killed! Co.. Supreme Court of Illinois, 1975 Lou Backrodt Chevrolet Co. ( 1975 ). Illinois opinions would been., one child was killed and another was severely injured of Rockford ( Eugene E.,. On future damages owes a duty to make a reasonable inspection of an while!, 29 Ill.Dec set forth in Peterson are just as valid in the accident was used... 5 ( 1979 ) ). ” [ e.s., peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co. 329.., the other for peterson v lou bachrodt chevrolet co wrongful death of the Citing case the party that created risk! Ill.2D 353, 362-63, 29 Ill.Dec of its sale ; ( b. expand Peterson beyond gratuitous care... 322 A.2d 440. al., Appellees, v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet COMPANY, Appellant an automobile prior to it. N.E.2D 401, 404., ages 11 and 8, were struck by automobile... The party that created the risk to appeal | Print | Comments 0...

Ao Customer Service Email, Mis Root Word, Ibm Informix Editions, Rhododendron Leaves Turning Brown, Dalstrong Santoku Knife Review, Duty Of Lawyer To Client Malaysia, Ge Capital Login, Average Water Bill Cambridge, Ma, Calories In Beer Bottle, Sedum Spathulifolium Propagation,