Question

Jaguar contracted to sell a new 2002 S-type car to Jim. An oversight in the building of the car led to the installation of a ten-year-old engine with over 50,000 miles already on it. When Jim's mechanic made Jim aware of the problem, Jim demanded that Jaguar replace it. Because of the cost of replacing the engine and the loss in value when the car left the lot, Jaguar refused. Jim sued Jaguar. Based on the reasoning in Case 17.1, Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent, the court in this case would most likely rule in favor of
a. Jaguar, because the installed engine was of the same quality, appearance, market value, and cost as a new engine.
b. Jim, because the installed engine was not of the same quality as a new engine.
c. Jaguar, because the omission was both trivial and innocent.
d. Jim, because the engine was not exactly as the contract had specified.


Answer

This answer is hidden. It contains 1 characters.