Florida Statute 672.318 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS

Chapter 672
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: SALES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 672.318

672.318 Third-party beneficiaries of warranties express or implied.—A seller’s warranty whether express or implied extends to any natural person who is in the family or household of his or her buyer, who is a guest in his or her home or who is an employee, servant or agent of his or her buyer if it is reasonable to expect that such person may use, consume or be affected by the goods and who is injured in person by breach of the warranty. A seller may not exclude nor limit the operation of this section.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 1, ch. 67-574; s. 567, ch. 97-102.

Note.—s. 2-318, U.C.C.

F.S. 672.318 on Google Scholar

F.S. 672.318 on CourtListener

Amendments to 672.318

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 672.318

Total Results: 16

Kramer v. Piper Aircraft Corp.

520 So. 2d 37, 1988 WL 10275

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1988 | Docket: 2514539

Cited 58 times | Published

in those cases which fall within the scope of § 672.318, Fla. Stat. (1985), of the Florida Uniform Commercial

Taylor v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

555 F. Supp. 59

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 1983 | Docket: 1018683

Cited 18 times | Published

seller's implied warranty is circumscribed by § 672.318,[5] Fla.Stat., as interpreted by Florida courts

McCarthy v. Florida Ladder Company

295 So. 2d 707, 15 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 375

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 1974 | Docket: 1762008

Cited 18 times | Published

More recently, the Uniform Commercial Code, Section 672.318, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., specifies that an employee

Hartman v. OPELIKA MACH. & WELDING

414 So. 2d 1105

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 1982 | Docket: 1707006

Cited 9 times | Published

to expect such person may use" the product. Section 672.318, Florida Statutes. [7] As previously noted

In Re Asbestos Litigation

679 F. Supp. 1096

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1987 | Docket: 1075052

Cited 8 times | Published

caused injury to the Plaintiffs. See Fla. Stat. § 672.318 (1985). Plaintiffs have also alleged sufficient

Standard Jury Instructions-Civil Cases

778 So. 2d 264, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 518, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1371, 2000 WL 889771

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 2000 | Docket: 1290340

Cited 7 times | Published

of warranty previously requiring privity, see § 672.318, Florida Statutes (1987), and Kramer v. Piper

OCEAN RITZ v. GGV Associates, Ltd.

710 So. 2d 702, 1998 WL 210330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 1, 1998 | Docket: 1445342

Cited 5 times | Published

warranty runs to third-party beneficiaries. Section 672.318, Florida Statutes. In the case of services

Standard Jury Inst.-Civil Cases (No. 02-2)

872 So. 2d 893, 2004 WL 635319

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 2004 | Docket: 1356890

Cited 4 times | Published

of warranty previously requiring privity, see § 672.318, Florida Statutes Fla. Stat. (1987); Kramer v

Carlson v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

693 F. Supp. 1073, 7 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 751, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13788, 1987 WL 47781

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1987 | Docket: 2258182

Cited 4 times | Published

respect to goods of that kind." Florida Statute § 672.318 provides that: [a] seller's warranty whether express

prod.liab.rep.(cch)p 11,154 Harold C. Kramer and Joan W. Kramer, His Wife v. Piper Aircraft Corporation, a Pennsylvania Corporation

801 F.2d 1279, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 32259

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 15, 1986 | Docket: 965361

Cited 4 times | Published

intended beneficiaries. See Fla.Stat.Ann. § 672.-318 (“A seller’s warranty whether express or implied

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases—Report No. 09-10

91 So. 3d 785, 2012 WL 1722576

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2012 | Docket: 60309984

Cited 2 times | Published

of-warranty previously requiring-privity, see ■§ 672.318, Fla. Stat. (Í98-7-), — and Kramer v. — Piper

Barry v. Ivarson Incorporated

249 So. 2d 44, 9 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 404

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 1971 | Docket: 1724913

Cited 2 times | Published

whether plaintiffs-lessees come within the ambit of § 672.318 which extends the provisions of F.S. § 672.314

In Re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES—REPORT NO. 13-01 (PRODUCTS LIABILITY)

160 So. 3d 869, 2015 WL 1400770

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 2015 | Docket: 2644854

Cited 1 times | Published

of warranty previously requiring privity, see F.S. 672.318 and Kramer, 520 So.2d at 39 & n.

In Re Standard Jury Instructions

540 So. 2d 825, 1989 WL 24051

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1989 | Docket: 1294577

Cited 1 times | Published

of warranty previously requiring privity, see § 672.318, Florida Statutes (1987), and Kramer v. Piper

Standard Jury Instructions—Civil Cases (No. 98-1)

711 So. 2d 1, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 287, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 605, 1998 WL 154462

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 2, 1998 | Docket: 64781036

Published

Smith was in privity with either defendant, see § 672.318, Fla. Stat. (1996), and regardless of any implied

Hammer v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

679 F. Supp. 1096, 6 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 73, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13537

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1987 | Docket: 66174463

Published

caused injury to the Plaintiffs. See Fla. Stat. § 672.318 (1985). Plaintiffs have also alleged sufficient