Unformatted text preview: of the burglary and the cell phone was her primary source of communication. She should have no problem show that the battery was defective and a breach of warranty causing the company to pay consequential damages. The Radartel cell phone company could argue the fact that the defect was within the battery itself and not within the phone. There should have been a limited warranty explaining that the battery was not covered by Radartel cellular company. I believe the outcome would be that the company that manufactured the battery would pay for the consequential damages to Barbara’s property....
View Full Document
- Spring '11
- Law, cell phone, Barbara, James Tilley BAA, BS Law Exam