Wilke v. Woodhouse Ford, Inc., 278 Neb. 800, 774 N.W.2d 370 (Neb. 2009)

Facts

  • Elizabeth A. Wilke and Mark Wilke bought a used 2002 Ford Econoline cargo van from Woodhouse Ford, Inc., a used-vehicle dealer.
  • The written purchase agreement conspicuously sold the van “AS IS” and “WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY,” and expressly disclaimed all express and implied warranties, including merchantability and fitness.
  • No evidence showed the dealer made representations about the van’s condition or quality.
  • After driving to a friend’s home, Mark parked the van in the driveway.
  • Shortly thereafter, the Wilkes’ three-year-old daughter allegedly moved the gearshift out of “park,” and the van rolled over Elizabeth’s foot and leg, causing her to fall and hit her head.
  • The Wilkes testified the key was out of the ignition when the gearshift was moved and the van began to roll.
  • A later inspection led the Wilkes to allege a defect in the transmission/gearshift mechanism allowing shifting out of “park” without the key in the ignition (and allegedly without depressing the brake).
  • The Wilkes sued on alternative theories: (1) negligence for failure to reasonably inspect for safety defects before sale and (2) breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.
  • The district court granted summary judgment to Woodhouse on both claims, and the Wilkes appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether the purchase agreement’s “as is” clause and warranty disclaimers effectively excluded the implied warranty of merchantability under Nebraska’s U.C.C.
  2. Whether a used-car dealer owes a tort duty to reasonably inspect for patent safety defects before sale despite an effective warranty disclaimer, and whether disputed facts on breach and causation precluded summary judgment.

Decision

  • The court affirmed summary judgment for Woodhouse on the implied warranty of merchantability claim.
  • The court held the disclaimer was conspicuous and expressly referenced merchantability, satisfying U.C.C. requirements for excluding implied warranties.
  • The court reversed summary judgment on the negligence claim and remanded.
  • The court held a used-vehicle dealer has a duty of reasonable care to inspect for patent safety defects before sale, and that duty is not eliminated by an “as is” warranty disclaimer.
  • The court found the record contained genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether a reasonable pre-sale inspection would have revealed a gearshift safety defect and whether any defect caused Elizabeth Wilke’s injuries.
  • An implied warranty of merchantability may be excluded by a conspicuous written disclaimer that specifically references “merchantability,” including by an “as is” sale meeting U.C.C. requirements.
  • Contractual allocation of risk through warranty disclaimers does not necessarily eliminate an independent common-law duty of reasonable care in tort.
  • Used-car dealers owe a duty to reasonably inspect vehicles for patent safety defects before sale; that duty cannot be waived by an “as is” clause.
  • Summary judgment is improper when evidence permits reasonable disagreement on material facts concerning breach of duty and proximate causation.

Conclusion

The Nebraska Supreme Court enforced a conspicuous “as is” disclaimer to bar an implied warranty of merchantability claim, but held that a used-car dealer still must exercise reasonable care to inspect for patent safety defects and that disputed facts required a negligence claim to proceed.