Harnden v. Jayco, Inc.

Harnden (plaintiff) sued Jayco (defendant) after a vehicle he bought from Jayco kept malfunctioning despite repeated repair attempts. Jayco moved for summary judgment, relying on an expert report by its own employee stating the defects were minor, cheaply repairable, and that the vehicle was otherwise in good condition. Harnden objected that the report was not submitted as a sworn affidavit as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e) requires; Jayco offered to resubmit it in proper form, but the trial court declined the offer and granted Jayco summary judgment anyway. Harnden appealed.