A dealer in Seminole County, Florida, contacted Harley-Davidson to secure authorization to sell the dealership to PowerSports. Harley had questions about PowerSports' business model to make sure it would meet the requirements Harley-Davidson had established for its dealers. Based on the answers provided by PowerSports, the transfer of the dealership was approved. Shortly after approving the transfer, Harley-Davidson discovered that PowerSports had not intended to operate its dealership in accordance with the Harley business model, which the firm required all dealerships to follow.
Harley sued to rescind the transfer of the dealership on grounds that providing false answers to Harley-Davidson's queries during the negotiation of the transfer constituted misrepresentation. Harley also sought compensatory damages and punitive damages. The trial court held for Power-Sports, and Harley-Davidson appealed. How do you think the appellate court resolved the appeal? Why?