Topic 5: Sales Transactions and Related Issue

Professor Post: View the case study “Warranty: Who Is Distorting What?” in You Be the Judge. After you receive the judge’s decision on this case, review Chapter 20 of the textbook. What is the distinction between an implied warranty of merchantability and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose? Which warranty did the plaintiff breach in this matter?

Your initial post should include your analysis and evidence from other cases that supports your analysis. Cite any external sources that were not part of the interactive exercise. Your follow-up discussion should challenge your classmates’ findings and defend your own position. Follow-up discussions to classmates’ initial responses should integrate course theories with a practical application of the subject; offer a personal observation or experience; reference real-world examples, current events; or present current research on the topic that encourages further discussion and ongoing dialogue with other students and the instructor in the class.

Student Post: Implied warranty of merchantability was created by the UCC to protect to buyers from goods sold that are defective. Implied warranty of merchantability creates a protection of buyers that goods sold from a merchant who are experienced in the industry. In the You Be the Judge case, when the judge asks the defendant how long he has been in operation, she is trying to determine if he had the knowledge to know what goods would be in good condition or defective. The UCC states that under the implied warranty of merchantability, “goods must be fit for the ordinary purposes of which goods are used” (Langvardt et al., 2019, p.584).

Implied warranty of fitness relies on the seller’s industry knowledge to assist the buyer in purchasing goods for a particular purpose (Langvardt et al., 2019, p.587). In order for the implied warranty of fitness to apply to a transaction, the seller must know the purpose for which the goods will be used and that the seller’s is relying on the buyer’s knowledge to selected the right product for the particular purpose. In the You Be the Judger case, the seller was aware that the guitars would be used for an outdoor concert and the buyer asked the defendant to select guitars in good condition for this purpose. Because of this, the buyer breached the implied warranty of fitness, as found in the case. While I believe that plaintiff could have elaborated on the specific requirements of the guitars needed for the concert, the defendant should have evaluated the circumstances presented to him by the buyer and choose guitars that would be able to perform at a louder volume for an outdoor concert.

Resource:

Langvardt, A. W., Barnes, A. J., Prenkert, J. D., McCrory, M. A., & Perry, J. E. (2019). Business law: The ethical, global, and e-commerce environment (17th ed.). McGraw Hill Education. 

Can you write a substantive reply to the above post from the student?