Conflicting and overlapping warranties: 2+ warranties sometimes exist in singl sales transaction and are cumulative. Here are the rules 1) exact specification > inconsistent samples from general language of description 2) sample from goods> inconsistent general language 3) express warranty > implied warranty but implied warranty >express • Disclaimers excluding and limiting warranties: the creation of express, implied and warranties of titles are not automatic. The seller can apply disclaimer in sales contract that can be one-sided • Discalimer by examination: • If defects are hidden, the seller is always liable • 6. Demonstrate an understanding of the circumstances in which strict liability principle apply.
t is ve nt of of he ds. e it ty. le > d d, es of Pepsi Center. how companies can purposely avoid having laws applied that they don't want applied. Opted out of CISG Webster v. blue ship tea room Woman chocked on fish bone in chowder. Judgement for defendant granted. Merchants can disclaim warranties under certain circumstances, but there are limitations Dempsey v. Rosenthal Poodle with 1 nut. This is a matter of breaching implied warranty of fitness.
apply. Liability is used with defects are reasonably apparent. If seller is retailer or wholesaler he has no duty to inspect new goods. • Negligence theory: buyer does not have to notify the seller of discovering defect prove a warranty existed. Plaintiff must prove doctrine of res ipsa loquitur "the thing speaks for itself" • Strict liability theory lies in notion that merchant and manufacturers are better ab to bear losses than injured consumer. No need to prove negligence in a tort action will make sellers more mindful of accident prevention. It can be viewed as an extension of the implied warranty of merchantability and is to be considered actio in tort than under warranty • Burden of proof must be in a defective condition when they leave the seller and that lies with the plaintiff to show that the product was defective at the time of sal • Economic loss doctrine. Strong line between tort liability and contract liability •
or ble n ons le Case Knight vs. Just Born Hot tamales candy Case Red Rose Transit Auth. Vs North American Bus Industries Based on economic loss doctrine because of buss being short in electrical system and catching fire Notes on case: a warranty action also has a built-in limitation on liability where tort action could subject manufacturer to damages of indefinite amount. Now courts have a "risk/utility test"
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 8 pages?
- Spring '14
- Contract Law, Implied warranty