## Facts

- John and Joan Johnson bought a new Chevrolet pickup truck on October 7, 1980, trading in an older truck and paying $4,202.10 cash after the trade-in credit.
- The truck developed performance problems immediately and continued to have issues despite repair attempts.
- On November 30, 1980, the Johnsons notified General Motors that they revoked acceptance and attempted to return the truck for a full refund; General Motors refused.
- The Johnsons sued to enforce revocation of acceptance and recover the purchase price under Kansas’s enactment of U.C.C. Article 2.
- While the suit was pending, the Johnsons continued using the truck and drove 14,619 miles after the revocation notice.
- At trial, General Motors offered a Federal Highway Administration per-mile “cost of owning and operating” figure of 33.2 cents per mile.
- The trial court found revocation was proper, but awarded General Motors a $4,702.94 setoff for post-revocation use using the per-mile figure, effectively eliminating the Johnsons’ recovery, and denied prejudgment interest.
- The Johnsons appealed the setoff methodology and the denial of prejudgment interest.

## Issues

1. After a buyer rightfully revokes acceptance under U.C.C. § 2-608, is the seller entitled to a setoff for the buyer’s post-revocation use, and how should that setoff be measured?
2. May a court calculate the setoff using a generalized per-mile “cost of ownership and operation” metric that includes depreciation and other components?
3. Is the buyer entitled to prejudgment interest on the net amount owed after accounting for an appropriate setoff where the amount is liquidated or readily ascertainable?

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the finding that the Johnsons properly revoked acceptance.
- The court held the seller is entitled to a reasonable allowance for the buyer’s post-revocation use.
- The court reversed the setoff calculation because the 33.2 cents per-mile “cost of owning” metric was excessive and improperly included elements (notably depreciation) effectively returned to the seller when the truck was returned.
- The court held prejudgment interest should be awarded on the net amount due to the buyer to the extent the claim is liquidated or readily ascertainable after using a proper setoff method.
- The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for recalculation of the setoff and for an award of appropriate prejudgment interest.

## Legal Principles

- A buyer who rightfully revokes acceptance under U.C.C. § 2-608 may recover the purchase price, subject to an equitable credit to the seller for benefits the buyer received from post-revocation use.
- Continued use after revocation does not automatically defeat revocation, but it can justify a reasonable allowance to prevent unjust enrichment.
- A post-revocation use setoff must reflect the reasonable value of use actually received and should not double-count depreciation or other value the seller recaptures when the goods are returned.
- Under Kansas law, prejudgment interest is generally available on liquidated claims, including amounts determinable by computation from known standards; in revocation cases, interest may run on the net, ascertainable balance owed after a proper setoff.

## Conclusion

The Kansas Supreme Court required that any post-revocation setoff be limited to the reasonable value of the buyer’s use rather than a generalized ownership-cost schedule that overcompensates the seller, and it directed an award of prejudgment interest on the net restitution once the amount became readily calculable.


Johnson v. Gen. Motors Corp., Chevrolet Motor Div., 668 P.2d 139 (Kan. 1983)