Warranties

AuthorVal Ricks
Pages424-454
424
Chapter 10. Warranties
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-312. Warranty of Title and Against
Infringement; Buyer’s Obligation Against Infringement.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-313. Express Warranties by Affirmation,
Promise, Description, Sample, and cmts. 1, 3, 4, and 8.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314. Implied Warranty: Merchantability;
Usage of Trade.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-315. Implied Warranty: Fitness for Particular
Purpose.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-316. Exclusion or Modification of Warranties.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-317. Cumulation and Conflict of Warranties
Express or Implied.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-318. Third Party Beneficiaries of Warranties
Express or Implied, Alternatives A, B, and C.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-719. Contractual Modification or Limitation
of Remedy.
Questions:
1. In a sale of goods, does the seller normally promise that the buyer will actually
own the goods?
2. Can a buyer of goods normally rest assured that the seller promises that no bank
has taken a collateral interest in the goods that would allow the bank to take the
goods back after the sale?
425
3. A Horizon Organic Milk carton says that the milk is fat free. Is that a warranty?
What makes you think it was the basis of the bargain? (See § 2-313 cmts. 3 & 8.)
Must reliance on the warranty be shown in order to prove that it is the basis of the
bargain?
4. The Horizon carton also says that Horizon Organic milk "is always the very
highest quality milk.Is that a warranty?
5. A farmer says that his bull is "the greatest living dairy bull.Is that a warranty?
6. What if the used car dealer says of a certain car, "This car is in great shape"? Is
that a warranty?
7. Must Horizon milk purchased from Kroger (a grocery store chain) be
merchantable?
8. If I buy the Horizon milk and my neighbor who is dining with us drinks it and as
a result becomes ill, can he sue?
9. Do garage sale items come with a warranty of merchantability?
10. Might garage sale items come with a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose?
Karen BENTLEY v. Charles SLAVIK and Rosemary Slavik (1987)
United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STIEHL, District Judge:
1] This cause was tried before the Court, without a jury, on Ma y 26 and 27,
1987. Having heard and considered the evidence and arguments of all parties, the
Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by
Rule 52(a) of the Fed.R.Civ.P.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT