Exercise 2 p.44
Case Brief
Home Pride Foods Of Iowa, Inc. v. Martin
Court of Appeals of Iowa. December 24, 2003796 N.W.2d 456 (Table)2003 WL 23005185
Facts:
Lynn Martin bought six months' worth of frozen food for $339.95 each month from a salesman of Home
Pride Foods of Iowa. She was also given a gas grill that she was informed was free, separate from her
food costs even though she needed to sign two contracts. Lynn Martin received a bill for the grill,
$2764.68 plus $833.52 in interest over a thirty-six-month term. She received the gas grill and food and
made two payments on the grill. After the third invoice, Lynn realized that the contract required her to
pay for three years at eighteen percent interest. Unhappy with this realization she asked Home Pride
Foods of Iowa to take the grill back. She did not make any more payments on the grill. Home Pride Foods
of Iowa filed a suit to acquire the remaining balance for the grill. Martin responded with a counterclaim
of fraud and violations of the Truth in Lending Act against Home Pride Foods of Iowa.
Issue:
Whether Martin, the consumer, owes Home Pride Foods of Iowa money for the grill.
Whether Home Pride Foods of Iowa violated the Truth in Lending Act and committed fraud for
misrepresenting the conditions of ownership of the grill.
.
Holding:
All elements of fraud were proven. However, no actual damages have been awarded to Lynn Martin. The
jury awarded Lynn Martin $82,228.20 in punitive damages and the district court awarded her $42,368.71
in attorney fees. Home Pride had a $3,334.08 penalty pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act. The court
held that Home Pride Foods of Iowa misrepresented the price or lack thereof of their grill and punitive
damages awarded to the defendant, Martin were proper. This misrepresentation violated the company’s
due process rights.
Conclusion: Home Pride Foods of Iowa appeals on the grounds that the amount in punitive damages
should not have been awarded on the grounds that it violates the company’s rights. Home Pride Foods
also claims the court abused its responsibility when it admitted certain testimony, awarded attorney
fees, and calculated the statutory penalty for the Truth in Lending violations. This case is currently in
appeal.
Case Brief
Home Pride Foods Of Iowa, Inc. v. Martin
Court of Appeals of Iowa. December 24, 2003796 N.W.2d 456 (Table)2003 WL 23005185
Facts:
Lynn Martin bought six months' worth of frozen food for $339.95 each month from a salesman of Home
Pride Foods of Iowa. She was also given a gas grill that she was informed was free, separate from her
food costs even though she needed to sign two contracts. Lynn Martin received a bill for the grill,
$2764.68 plus $833.52 in interest over a thirty-six-month term. She received the gas grill and food and
made two payments on the grill. After the third invoice, Lynn realized that the contract required her to
pay for three years at eighteen percent interest. Unhappy with this realization she asked Home Pride
Foods of Iowa to take the grill back. She did not make any more payments on the grill. Home Pride Foods
of Iowa filed a suit to acquire the remaining balance for the grill. Martin responded with a counterclaim
of fraud and violations of the Truth in Lending Act against Home Pride Foods of Iowa.
Issue:
Whether Martin, the consumer, owes Home Pride Foods of Iowa money for the grill.
Whether Home Pride Foods of Iowa violated the Truth in Lending Act and committed fraud for
misrepresenting the conditions of ownership of the grill.
.
Holding:
All elements of fraud were proven. However, no actual damages have been awarded to Lynn Martin. The
jury awarded Lynn Martin $82,228.20 in punitive damages and the district court awarded her $42,368.71
in attorney fees. Home Pride had a $3,334.08 penalty pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act. The court
held that Home Pride Foods of Iowa misrepresented the price or lack thereof of their grill and punitive
damages awarded to the defendant, Martin were proper. This misrepresentation violated the company’s
due process rights.
Conclusion: Home Pride Foods of Iowa appeals on the grounds that the amount in punitive damages
should not have been awarded on the grounds that it violates the company’s rights. Home Pride Foods
also claims the court abused its responsibility when it admitted certain testimony, awarded attorney
fees, and calculated the statutory penalty for the Truth in Lending violations. This case is currently in
appeal.
