Spartan Equipment Co., Inc. v. Sumter County Sand Co., Div. of Glasscock Trucking, Inc., of South Carolina, No. 22493

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Writing for the Court: HARWELL; GREGORY, FINNEY and CHANDLER, JJ., and BRUCE LITTLEJOHN; NESS
• Citation: 341 S.E.2d 376,288 S.C. 98
• Parties: SPARTAN EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC., Appellant, v. SUMTER COUNTY SAND COMPANY, A DIVISION OF GLASSCOCK TRUCKING, INC., OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent. . Heard
• Docket Number: No. 22493
• Decision Date: 12 February 1986

Page 376

341 S.E.2d 376 288 S.C. 98 SPARTAN EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC., Appellant,
v.
SUMTER COUNTY SAND COMPANY, A DIVISION OF GLASSCOCK
TRUCKING, INC., OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent. No. 22493. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Heard Feb. 12, 1986.
Decided March 6, 1986.

Page 377

William E. DuRant, Jr., of Schwartz, McLeod & DuRant, Sumter, for appellant.

D. Gene Rickenbaker, and John E. Miles, Sumter, for respondent.

HARWELL, Justice:

Appellant brought suit to recover amounts due on a rental contract. Respondent claimed that it was entitled to an offset due to appellant's breach of warranty on a prior sales transaction between the two parties. The jury returned a verdict for the respondent without finding an offset. Appellant contends that, in the absence of an offset, it was entitled to a minimum of $12,019.11 rent which the respondent admitted that he had incurred. We agree and reverse and remand.

[288 S.C. 99] Appellant sells and leases heavy equipment. On March 30, 1982, the respondent purchased a used Koehring excavator from the appellant. Approximately two and a half months later, respondent leased a LS 5400 excavator from the appellant because the Koehring was in a state of disrepair. The monthly rental for the LS 5400 excavator, including insurance, was $5,400. Other terms of the rental agreement are in dispute. Respondent took possession of the LS 5400 excavator on June 15, 1982 and used it until August 24, 1982. The excavator was not returned until October 26, 1982. Respondent never paid the appellant any money on the rental equipment.

Appellant filed suit seeking accrued monthly rental from June 22, 1982 to October 26, 1982, together with accrued insurance and finance charges, as well as various bills appellant incurred in the repair and service of the excavator upon its return by the respondent. The respondent answered by way of a general denial and offset, claiming entitlement to offset damages allegedly incurred due to problems it had with the used Koehring excavator that it had purchased from the appellant. Respondent alleged that appellant breached its express warranties to the respondent on the Koehring excavator. Appellant denied that any express warranty was given to the respondent. The lower court ruled that there was no evidence as to an express warranty. The respondent, however, was allowed to amend his answer during the trial and proceed on the theory of implied warranty. Appellant contended that a disclaimer was...