Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 45.02.317 (2026)
Cumulation and conflict of warranties express or implied
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 45.02.317. Cumulation and conflict of warranties express or implied.
Warranties whether express or implied shall be construed as consistent with each other and as cumulative, but if that construction is unreasonable the intention of the parties determines which warranty is dominant. In ascertaining that intention the following rules apply:
(1) exact or technical specifications displace an inconsistent sample or model or general language of description;
(2) a sample from an existing bulk displaces inconsistent general language of description;
(3) an express warranty displaces an inconsistent implied warranty other than an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
Warranties whether express or implied shall be construed as consistent with each other and as cumulative, but if that construction is unreasonable the intention of the parties determines which warranty is dominant. In ascertaining that intention the following rules apply:
(1) exact or technical specifications displace an inconsistent sample or model or general language of description;
(2) a sample from an existing bulk displaces inconsistent general language of description;
(3) an express warranty displaces an inconsistent implied warranty other than an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 2017–2017 · leading case: Nelson v. MillerCoors, LLC, 246 F. Supp. 3d 666 (E.D.N.Y 2017).
Nelson v. MillerCoors, LLC, 246 F. Supp. 3d 666 (E.D.N.Y 2017). “Notwithstanding the shortcomings in the parties’, submissions, the Court observes that the cited provisions are functionally identical. . The following provisions from each of the statutory codes referenced in the Amended Complaint contain identical language: Alaska Stat.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.