This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: danger, should have discouraged distributors from selling to retailers who illegally packaged the goods in used milk containers, and should have refused to sell to distributors who didnt cooperate. 6. Where the damage testimony of an expert witness is speculative or not supported in the record, it should be stricken. Loss of the value of business (goodwill) may be recoverable as an element of consequential damages. 9. Whenever consumers are involved, consider the possibility that there is a consumer credit con- tract. The plaintiffs in this case are consumers who have borrowed money from a lender to purchase goods from a seller who is affiliated with the lender (both seller and lender are owned by Chrysler). Thus the con-tract is a consumer credit contract. Chrysler Credit was not a holder in due course. Therefore, it is subject to any defenses that the Feldes might have against the dealer, including that the car was defective....
View Full Document
- Spring '10