By: dmc-admin//September 3, 2002//
Kenneth and Sharon Rupena appeal a summary judgment dismissing their action against Palmer Johnson of Racine Inc., for breach of express and implied warranties and breach of contract. The trial court concluded that the warranty in the contract for the sale of a yacht was ambiguous, but that Kenneth Rupena’s deposition testimony clarified the parties’ intent that Palmer Johnson’s warranty only guaranteed that the yacht would have certain equipment and accessories and that its builder, Jefferson Yachts, would guarantee the yacht’s quality. We conclude that Rupena’s deposition testimony is not sufficiently clear regarding the parties’ intent to allow summary judgment. We also decline Palmer Johnson’s invitation to rule that the Rupenas’ settlement with Jefferson Yachts precludes any further recovery. That was not the basis of the trial court’s decision, and therefore, the court did not make appropriate findings or analysis on that issue. Further, Palmer Johnson’s brief does not direct this court to sufficient evidence in the record to support that theory. Therefore, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings.
This opinion will not be published.
Dist III, Door County, Kirk, J., Per Curiam
Attorneys:
For Appellant: William R. Steinmetz, Milwaukee; Colleen Ball, Milwaukee
For Respondent: David L. Weber, Sturgeon Bay; Jon Robert Pinkert, Sturgeon Bay