The warranty of merchantability, implied in almost every consumer purchase, rarely presents a litigation opportunity, even for the most-savvy advocates. For decades, courts have consistently interpreted the term 'merchantability' to connote a minimal, baseline assurance of product fitness and functionality.
CA's Flavor of Implied Warranty Leaves a Sour Taste
A recent decision from an appellate court in California offers footing for plaintiff attorneys to argue for an expanded definition of 'merchantability.' Such a development, which the Uniform Commercial Code neither compels nor suggests, marks a departure from settled law and presents a significant risk of higher warranty costs for manufacturers and higher prices for consumers.
By
Nathan MarcusenThis premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
