Farm Equipment Failed During a Critical Period. How a South Dakota Buyer Resolved the Dispute
The case examines warranty terms, repair attempts, and the losses claimed after the equipment stopped working.
The questionWhat can a farmer recover when new equipment fails under warranty during harvest?
Illustrative example
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — A South Dakota farmer has settled for $138,000 with an equipment dealer after a new combine broke down repeatedly during harvest.
The dealer attempted repairs three times in five weeks while grain stood in the field.
Delays left part of the crop exposed to weather, and the farmer paid to have neighbors harvest some fields.
Teravelle Law gathered the warranty, the dealer's service tickets and the custom-harvest invoices, and calculated the crop lost to the delay.
The dealer replaced the combine's drive system, extended the warranty and paid $138,000.
The warranty limited some consequential losses, so not all claimed crop losses were recovered.
Equipment warranties often limit damages for lost crops or business, so their terms shape what can be recovered.
About this story
Submitted by the firm. Source review: details provided and attested by the firm. See our publication standards.
