Mahaney purchased a used car from Perry Auto Exchange. Mahaney was told that the car was in “perfect, A-1, and first-class condition.” A written statement given to Mahaney at the time of the sale described the car as being in “good operating condition.” Mahaney had no opportunity to investigate the truth of these statements. Later, it was determined that the car had a problem in the differential and had no brakes at the time of the sale. Mahaney sued for rescission. Were Perry’s statements merely puffing or were they warranties upon which the rescission could be based? (Mahaney v. Perry Auto Exchange, 85 N.E.2d 558, Ohio)