Mrugala v. Fairfield Ford, Inc.

State: Illinois

Court: 1st District Appellate

Docket No: 1-99-2929 Rel

Case Date: 09/28/2001

No. 1-99-2929

September 28, 2001

FRANK MRUGALA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

FAIRFIELD FORD, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Appeal from the
Circuit Court of
Cook County.

No. 98 M1 120247

Honorable
James McCarthy,
Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE REID delivered the opinion of the court:

Frank Mrugala appeals the trial court's orders which heldthat Mrugala revoked acceptance to a 1995 Chevrolet S-10 andsubsequently required Mrugala to surrender the title to FairfieldFord, Inc. (Fairfield). Mrugala contends that (1) the trialcourt lacked jurisdiction to hear Fairfield's petition undersection 2-1401 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1401(West 1998)) due to improper notice, (2) the trial court lackedjurisdiction to modify the arbitration award, which was silent asto the issue of revocation or, alternatively, (3) Fairfieldfailed to act with due diligence in seeking to modify or rejectthe arbitration award. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.

BACKGROUND

On or about May 29, 1996, Mrugala, purchased a 1995Chevrolet S-10 from Fairfield. The sale price of the ChevroletS-10 was $34,037.70. Mrugala also purchased an extended warrantyfor the vehicle from GE Capital Insurance Services Agency, Inc.(GE). After experiencing continuous problems with the vehicle,which Fairfield was unable to repair, Mrugala attempted to revokehis acceptance of the vehicle. Fairfield refused to accept therevocation but remained in possession of the vehicle. Mrugalafiled a complaint on April 15, 1998.

In his three-count complaint, Mrugala alleged claims againstFairfield for breach of written warranty and breach of impliedwarranty pursuant to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and forrevocation of acceptance pursuant to section 2310(d) of theMagnuson-Moss Warranty Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act(15 U.S.C.