Bindinglaw

IL · jury_instructions

Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Civil) 185.03

Magnuson-Moss Act--Burden of Proof—Breach of Written Warranty

activein force · 2026-08-19 – presentas-observed

In order for Plaintiff to recover for a breach of written warranty claim against Defendant,

Plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following propositions:

First, the existence of a defect in the [vehicle] [product] covered by the warranty;

Second, compliance with the terms of the warranty by Plaintiff;

Third, that the Plaintiff afforded Defendant a reasonable opportunity to repair the

defect; and

Fourth, that Defendant, through its authorized dealer [did not repair] [was unable to

repair] the [vehicle] [product] after being given a reasonable number of attempts or a reasonable

amount of time; or did not offer to refund or replace within a reasonable amount of time.

Fifth, that Plaintiff su stained d amages as a result of Defendant's failure to take action

required by the warranty to correct the defect or malfunction or otherwise to correct the problem.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has

been proven, then your verdict should be for the Plaintiff. On the other hand, if you find from

your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proven, then

your verdict should be for the Defendant.

Instruction, Notes and Comment approved January 2007.

Provenance

Source
illinoiscourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-08-20
Edition
2026-08-19
Content hash
581b1639f17809b2657166cf943995a6afe800991f5ace7ccf3ef4369328bb03
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.