Explain an express warranty, an implied warranty and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

SEction 1 ( must be 100 words or more )
Explain an express warranty, an implied warranty and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
What is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
What is the difference between a lien and a judgment? Can a judgment become a lien?
Explain Market share liability.
What is an “unreasonably dangerous product?”
Classic Case 16.1
Read Webster v. Blue Ship Tea Room, 198 N.E.2d 309 (1964).
Webster is a well-known example of a court protecting local customs and traditions. When a patron in a Boston restaurant chokes on a fish bone that is in a bowl of chowder, the court concludes there was no liability issue because the good(s) were “merchantable;” i.e., the chowder was not different from “the ordinary purpose for which goods are used.” It was neither the best chowder, nor the worst, but it was of like kind. As the court observed, “the joys of life in New England include the ready availability of fresh fish chowder. We should be prepared to cope with the hazards of fish bones, the occasional presence of which in chowder is, it seems to us, to be anticipated, and which, in the light of a hallowed tradition, do not impair their fitness or merchantability.”
Do you agree? Should one expect to dine on the occasional shrimp shell along the Gulf Coast or share a swig of beer with the occasional crab shell in a Baltimore crab cake?
SEction 2 ( must be 200 words or more )
Distinguish between “puffery” (“this baby hugs the road like a Ferrari”) and statements of fact (“this Mustang accelerates from zero to 60 m.p.h. in 4.8 seconds”). The former is definitely an opinion that does not create a warranty while the latter is capable of empirical testing on the road. If the car cannot reach 60 m.p.h in 4.8 seconds, the seller has breached an express warranty.
Have you experienced examples of either situation in recent advertising? Please cite an example or two.
Section 3 ( must be 200 words or more)
Many, which includes possibly some of you, have heard of the 1992 McDonald’s “hot coffee” case (Liebeck v McDonald’s Restaurants, Inc. You may research this case on the internet). The case involved a woman in the passenger seat of a car that used a drive-through window at a McDonald’s in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The plaintiff, who was an elderly female, placed a cup of coffee between her thighs as she exited the restaurant, and when the driver accelerated the car, it spilled on her, which caused third degree burns. The coffee was supposedly 190 degrees, which was alleged to be too hot to serve to consumers.
The attorneys for the plaintiff, Liebeck, had argued that, at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C), McDonald’s coffee was defective, further claiming that the coffee was too hot and it was likely that McDonald’s coffee would cause serious injury more so than coffee that was served in other restaurants.
According to the National Coffee Association, “the brewing temperature of the water that is used to make coffee is very important. It should be between 195 F (91 C) and 205 F (96 C). The closer to 205 F (96 C) the better. Boiling water (212 F – 100 C) should never be used, as it will burn the coffee. Water that is less than 195 F (91 C) will not extract properly.”
Is the problem that the coffee was served in a drive through window or was it that the coffee itself was “too hot” as the plaintiff alleged? Should people realize that coffee is hot? Was the product “defective?” Explain your answers.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.