WI · jury_instructions
Wis JI-Civil 3310
Magnuson Moss Claim
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is a federal law that provides for certain rights
in connection with warranties and service contracts applying to consumer products.
Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, (plaintiff) has the burden of proving the
following elements:
1. that (defendant) supplied (plaintiff) with a (name of consumer product) that
was defective or that malfunctioned;
2. that the defect or malfunction was covered by the warranty;
3. that (plaintiff) afforded (defendant) or defendant’s representative a
reasonable opportunity to repair the defect or malfunction;
4. that (defendant) failed to repair the (name of consumer product) at no
charge to (plaintiff) within a reasonable time.
If (plaintiff) proves these elements, then (defendant) violated the Magnuson-Moss
Warranty Act.
The act does not allow (defendant) an unlimited time to perform repairs that are
required to be performed under a written warranty. Rather, the repairs must be performed
within a reasonable time. It is for you to determine what is a reasonable time based on
the facts and circumstances as you find them.
[It is not a defense to (plaintiff)’s claim that (defendant) tried to fix the (name of
consumer product) within a reasonable time but was unable to do so. Commendable
efforts alone do not relieve the defendant of its obligation to repair under the warranty.]
SPECIAL VERDICT
Question 1: Did (defendant) supply (plaintiff) with a (name of consumer
product) that was defective or that malfunctioned?
Answer: ____________
Yes or No
Question 2: If you answered “yes” to question 1, answer this question:
Was the defect or malfunction covered by the terms of the warranty?
Answer: ____________
Yes or No
Question 3: If you answered “yes” to question 2, answer this question:
Did (plaintiff) provide (defendant or defendant’s representative) a
reasonable opportunity to repair the defect or malfunction?
Answer: ____________
Yes or No
Question 4: If you answered “yes” to question 3, answer this question:
Did (defendant or defendant’s representative) fail to repair the defect
or malfunction within a reasonable time?
Answer: ____________
Yes or No
Question 5: If you answered “yes,” to question 4, answer questions 5a & b:
a) What is the difference, if any, between the value of the (name of
consumer product) if it had been as warranted and the value of the
(name of consumer product) with the defect or malfunction?
Answer: ____________
History
Wis JI-Civil 3310 (2020). ©2020, Regents, Univ. of Wis. Prepared by the Wisconsin Civil Jury Instructions Committee of the Wisconsin Judicial Conference with the University of Wisconsin Law School; posted by the Wisconsin State Law Library with the University's permission.
Provenance
- Source
- wilawlibrary.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
ab898434ca9527818286c4a8e9a8a96a6846ae8447180770cd427fde39a66a9a
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.