Sauvageau v. Detroit Diesel Corp.

• Decision Date: 14 November 2012
• Docket Number: No. 11–P–1434.,11–P–1434.
• Citation: 978 N.E.2d 107,82 Mass.App.Ct. 1121
• Court: Appeals Court of Massachusetts
• Parties: Roger SAUVAGEAU & another v. DETROIT DIESEL CORPORATION & another.

82 Mass.App.Ct. 1121
978 N.E.2d 107

Roger SAUVAGEAU & another ¹
v.
DETROIT DIESEL CORPORATION & another.²

No. 11–P–1434.

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

November 14, 2012.

By the Court (CYPHER, KATZMANN & MILKEY, JJ.).

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28

On appeal, Roger and Helen Sauvageau (collectively, Sauvageau) challenge the following rulings by a Superior Court judge: the grant of Detroit Diesel Corporation's (Detroit Diesel) motion for summary judgment on Sauvageau's breach of a two-year express warranty claim and the denial of the motion to reconsider that ruling; the denial of Sauvageau's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) on the breach of the two-year express warranty claim and a breach of contract claim against Detroit Diesel; and the postverdict dismissal of Sauvageau's G.L. c. 93A claim against Detroit Diesel.³ Codefendant Johnson & Towers, Inc. (Johnson & Towers), cross-appeals from the denial of its JNOV motion contesting its liability on Sauvageau's breach of contract claim. We affirm.

Background. In November, 2002, Sauvageau purchased a forty-eight foot ocean yacht powered by two series sixty diesel engines manufactured by Detroit Diesel. The seller of the yacht, who was its first purchaser, took delivery of the yacht in July, 2001. In December, 2003, Sauvageau received a letter (modification bulletin) from Detroit Diesel. The modification bulletin stated that Detroit Diesel had found a potential defect with an engine component on certain engine models and that Detroit Diesel would replace the component on Sauvageau's engines free of charge. Sauvageau, as instructed by the modification bulletin, contacted an authorized distributor of Detroit Diesel, Johnson & Towers, to request an appointment to perform the repairs. The repairs were never performed and the component part on one of the engines malfunctioned in August, 2004, resulting in significant damage to that engine. Sauvageau spent $41,346 to repair and rebuild the engine. Sauvageau then brought claims for breach of contract, breach of warranty, and a G.L. c. 93A claim against Detroit Diesel, Johnson & Towers, and New England Detroit Diesel–Allison (NEDD–A),⁴ a regional subsidiary of Detroit Diesel. As detailed below, the judge granted summary judgment, in part, in favor of Detroit Diesel, and trial proceeded on the remaining issues. The jury found that Johnson & Towers had entered into a repair contract with Sauvageau, breached the contract, and as a result, was liable to Sauvageau in the amount of $41,346 (the cost of repair).

Discussion. 1. The motion judge (who was also the trial judge) granted summary judgment in favor of Detroit Diesel on Sauvageau's claim for breach of the two-year express warranty. The judge dismissed this claim as time barred, stating: “clearly, any claim under the two year limited warranty is barred in that the engine failure in question occurred in August 2004, more than three years after the July 12, 2001 tender of delivery [to the original owner].” Sauvageau argues that the judge erred because the warranty was not conditioned on “failure of the engine” but rather on “any malfunction occurring during the warranty period resulting from defects in material or workmanship.”...