|
John, I can provide you some generic free legal advice, and if your state has an informal "Small Claims Court" like we do here in Indiana, it might be worth looking into, but dont hold your breath. One advantage of the Small Claims route is the very low low cost and no need to hire a lawyer. 1) Many "Verbal Contracts" are enforceable in a Court but the Plaintiff (you in this case) has the burden of proof by a "Preponderance of Evidence" Also, the doctrine of "Caveat Emptor" (let the buyer beware) would have to be overcome by you and any winesses to the conversation and agreement required to establish (to a Judges satisfaction) the Seller sold the Tractor which he said "would run" and you reasonably relied upon such. However, if you had the opportunity to but didnt try her out yourself, a Judge might still invoke Caveat Emptor (a lot depends on the Judge you draw and his sympathies). 2) If you bring action in Small Claims, you will need good evidence like the repairmans live in Court sworn testimony and receipts regarding the condition of the tractor when you bought it. CAUTION if it would or could still run when you bought it, even if very badly knocking etc, you will likely LOOSE since how well it ran is then NOT THE ISSUE. He said it would run and it would have or could have even if badlyyyyy yy, YOU LOOSE. You would have to establish BOTH he said it would run PLUS theres no way it could have whatsoever (from an expert witness like the mechanic you mentioned) The applicable law sort of boils down to starting with Caveat Emptor (against your favor),,,,, ,,,which you have to rebut by a preponderance of evidence the Seller sold it as "Will Run" (to overcome the caveat emptor legal presumption in Sellers favor) ,,,,, ,,,,, and then evidence to establish it did not run and what it took to repair it. Another disadvantage you have as a Plaintiff (have to win your case by a preponderance of evidence) is that equal evidence (he said she said = 50/50) doesnt win for you. Also, if the only other witness is a friend of yours, the law doesnt give that near as much weight as a non biased neutral witness, say if a stranger to you was there and could testify under oath he heard the Seller tell you "It will run". If its just your word against his (regarding the sales agreement and it will run), the Plaintiff hasnt met preponderance of evidence. Sooooo oooo, due to the economics of the situation, it sounds like Small Claims may be your only choice and possibility, and still you have to have a sympathetic Judge (who doesnt favor Caveat Emptor) and prove by a preponderance of Evidence he said it will run but that it could not possibly have (and still hope the Judge dont ask if you had the opportunity to try to hear it run it but didnt, therefore waived any possible claim) Its sure not a case I would ever take on any contingency agreement cuz its no sure winner or strong case, but it worth a chance in an informal inexpensive Small Claims situation if your State has such. Good Luck, God Bless and Merry Christmas to yall John T Nordhoff, Retired Electrical Engineer now Attorney at Law in Indiana
|
