Cal. Codes » Commercial Code
California Codes

Cal. Commercial Code § 2315 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Where the seller at the time of contracting has reason to know any particular purpose for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is unless excluded or modified under the next section an implied warranty that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2022 · leading case: In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp. 3d 772 (N.D. Ill. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp. 3d 772 (N.D. Ill. 2016). · cites it 2× “Code § 7-2-315 ; Cal. Com. Code § 2315 ; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-2-315 ; Del.”
Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Co., 243 F. Supp. 3d 1074 (N.D. Cal. 2017). “2d 377 (1975) (citing Cal. Com. Code § 2315 (2)(c), (f)). Defendant argues that a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability can only exist if the product is not fit for its ordinary purpose and the product “did not possess even the most basic degree of fitness for…”
Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Co., 273 F. Supp. 3d 1052 (N.D. Cal. 2017). “2d 377 (1975) (citing Cal. Com. Code § 2315 (2)(c), (f)). Defendant argues that a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability can only exist if the product is not fit for its ordinary purpose and the product “did not possess even the most basic degree of fitness for…”
Birdsong v. Apple, Inc., 590 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2009). “Code § 2314; (3) breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, Cal. Com.Code § 2315; (4) violation of the California UCL, Cal.”
Viggiano v. Hansen Nat. Corp., 944 F. Supp. 2d 877 (C.D. Cal. 2013). “” Cal. Comm.Code § 2315. “A ‘particular purpose’ differs from the ordinary purpose for which the goods are used in that- it envisages a specific use by the buyer which is peculiar to the nature of his business whereas the ordinary purposes for which goods are used are those…”
In Re Ferrero Litig., 794 F. Supp. 2d 1107 (S.D. Cal. 2011). “2d 377 (1975) (citing Cal. Com. Code § 2315 (2)(c), (f)). Although Ferrero argues that Nutella® is fit for its ordinary purpose of consumption, Plaintiffs are bringing their claim under a different definition of merchantability, whether the product conforms with “the promises or…”
Nucal Foods, Inc. v. Quality Egg LLC, 918 F. Supp. 2d 1023 (E.D. Cal. 2013). “Cal. Comm.Code § 2315, comment 2. This comment also instructs that a contract may include both a warranty of merchantability and of fitness for a particular purpose.”
Hendricks v. Starkist Co., 30 F. Supp. 3d 917 (N.D. Cal. 2014). “” Cal.Com.Code § 2315. Plaintiffs opposition does not address this claim, apparently conceding the merits of the motion.”
Hilsley v. Gen. Mills, Inc., 376 F. Supp. 3d 1043 (S.D. Cal. 2019). “An implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose exists "[w]here the seller at the time of contracting has reason to know any particular purpose for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable…”
Evraets v. Intermedics Intraocular, Inc., 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8164 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994). “) California has adopted the Uniform Commercial Code implied warranty of fitness provision, which is a law of general applicability that relates to all products, not just medical devices.”
Huizar v. Abex Corp., 156 Cal. App. 3d 534 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984). “) Advanced further contends that an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose arose in its favor pursuant to the provisions of the California Commercial Code section 2315, and that expressed warranties were created in its favor under California Uniform Commercial Code…”
Gedalia v. Whole Foods Mkt. Servs., Inc., 53 F. Supp. 3d 943 (S.D. Tex. 2014). “” Cal. Com.Code § 2315 (West 2014); Tex. Bus.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
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.