Coghlan v. Wellcraft Marine Corp.

240 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2001)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P purchased a fishing boat manufactured by Wellcraft (D). It cost $28,000. P was motivated by D's marketing campaign for this line of boats, which emphasized the advantages of all-fiberglass construction. In addition to rot-resistance and durability, it is generally believed among mariners that all-fiberglass boats tend to hold their value better than their wood-fiberglass hybrid counterparts and that the boat they purchased was made entirely of fiberglass. P discovered that the deck was actually composed of 1.5 inches of plywood encased entirely within fiberglass. P filed suit against D, seeking class certification on behalf of all similarly situated owners. P alleged breach of the implied, statutory warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, deceptive trade practices, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy. D filed a limited motion to dismiss pursuant to 12(b)(6). The district court concluded that P had failed to allege any real damages, a required element for each of their causes of action. The court went well beyond the scope of the 12(b)(6) motion before it and sua sponte ordered all the claims dismissed, pending a satisfactory attempt to re-plead. P eventually appealed.