Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Where 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 Code Section 11-2-316 an implied warranty that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.
(Code 1933, § 109A-2 - 315, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1.)
- Nonapplicability of implied warranties to blood transfusions, organ transplants, etc., §§ 11-2-316,51-1-28.
- For article discussing manufacturer's warranty of merchantability and fitness under former § 96-307, see 10 Mercer L. Rev. 272 (1959). For article, "Sales Warranties Under Georgia's Uniform Commercial Code," see 1 Ga. St. B.J. 191 (1964). For article, "Georgia's New Statutory Liability for Manufacturers: An Inadequate Legislative Response," see 2 Ga. L. Rev 538 (1968). For article discussing aspects of third party practice (impleader) under the Georgia Civil Practice Act, see 4 Ga. St. B.J. 355 (1968). For article, "Consumer Protection Against Sellers Misrepresentations," see 20 Mercer L. Rev. 414 (1969). For article discussing interpretation of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code, see 4 Ga. L. Rev. 469 (1970). For article discussing the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, see 9 Ga. L. Rev. 149 (1974). For article, "Products Liability Law in Georgia: Is Change Coming?" see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 353 (1974). For article explaining the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, proposed in Georgia in 1973, see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 409 (1974). For article discussing modification of consumer warranty provisions of the U.C.C. by the Magnuson-Moss Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2301-2312) with special emphasis on attempted disclaimers, see 27 Mercer L. Rev. 1111 (1976). For article, "Buyer's Right of Rejection: A Quarter Century Under the Uniform Commercial Code, and Recent International Developments," see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 805 (1979). For article discussing applicability of implied warranty provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code to construction contracts, see 28 Emory L.J. 335 (1979). For article discussing the applicability of warranty provisions under the Uniform Commercial Code to domestic solar energy devices, see 30 Mercer L. Rev. 547 (1979). For article surveying recent judicial developments in commercial law, see 31 Mercer L. Rev. 13 (1979). For annual survey of law of contracts, see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 107 (1986). For article, "Contractual Limitations of Remedy and the Failure of Essential Purpose Doctrine," see 26 Ga. St. B.J. 113 (1990). For article, "Products Liability Law in Georgia Including Recent Developments," see 43 Mercer L. Rev. 27 (1991). For note discussing implied warranties in the sale of second-hand goods, see 17 Mercer L. Rev. 455 (1966). For note discussing products liability actions based on breach of implied warranty under the Uniform Commercial Code, see 4 Ga. L. Rev. 164 (1969). For note, "Allowance of Punitive Damages in Products Liability Claims," see 6 Ga. L. Rev. 613 (1972). For note, "Buyer's Right to Revoke Acceptance Against the Automobile Manufacturer for Breach of its Continuing Warranty of Repair or Replacement," see 7 Ga. L. Rev. 711 (1973). For note, "Does the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act Really Prohibit Design Defect Claims?: Examining Federal Preemption in Light of American Home Products Corp. v. Ferrari," see 26 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 617 (2010). For comment on Felder v. Neeves, 36 Ga. App. 41, 135 S.E. 219 (1926), see 1 Ga. L. Rev. No. 1 p. 51 (1927). For comment on Revlon, Inc. v. Murdock, 103 Ga. App. 842, 120 S.E.2d 912 (1961), see 24 Ga. B.J. 271 (1961). For comment on Redfern Meats, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 134 Ga. App. 381, 215 S.E.2d 10 (1975), see 27 Mercer L. Rev. 347 (1975).
- In light of the similarity between the provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 96-301 are included in the annotations for this section.
Implied warranty is raised by statute, while express warranty is by contract. Stewart v. Gainesville Glass Co., 131 Ga. App. 747, 206 S.E.2d 857 (1974), aff'd, 233 Ga. 578, 212 S.E.2d 377 (1975).
- Warranty of fitness warrants that goods sold are suitable for special purpose of buyer. Multivision N.W., Inc. v. Jerrold Elecs. Corp., 356 F. Supp. 207 (N.D. Ga. 1972).
Buying goods for general resale is not a "particular purpose" within meaning of O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315. Bruce v. Calhoun First Nat'l Bank, 134 Ga. App. 790, 216 S.E.2d 622 (1975).
- In order to create implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose, O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 requires that seller have reason to know of particular purpose for which goods are required and that buyer rely on seller's skill or judgment in selecting or furnishing suitable goods. Bruce v. Calhoun First Nat'l Bank, 134 Ga. App. 790, 216 S.E.2d 622 (1975).
- Implied warranty is a guaranty against loss only from latent defects. Jones v. Knightstown Body Co., 52 Ga. App. 667, 184 S.E. 427 (1936); Smith v. Northeast Ga. Fair Ass'n, 85 Ga. App. 32, 67 S.E.2d 836 (1951).
Law of implied warranty will not avail against patent defects, nor against latent defects which are either disclosed or are discoverable by exercise of caution on part of purchaser. Jones v. Knightstown Body Co., 52 Ga. App. 667, 184 S.E. 427 (1936); Wilkinson v. Rich's, Inc., 77 Ga. App. 239, 48 S.E.2d 552 (1948); Smith v. Northeast Ga. Fair Ass'n, 85 Ga. App. 32, 67 S.E.2d 836 (1951).
While plaintiff's argument that no warranty existed because a buyer inspected the blocks buying and used the buyer's own judgment in selecting purchases was relevant to an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, it was not applicable to the warranty of merchantability at issue. Willis Mining, Inc. v. Noggle, 235 Ga. App. 747, 509 S.E.2d 731 (1998).
- Parties may expressly agree on provisions of contract and extent of warranty, which may be more limited or more extensive than implied warranty of law. Jones v. Knightstown Body Co., 52 Ga. App. 667, 184 S.E. 427 (1936).
- Purchaser's acceptance of property bought with full knowledge of its defective condition constitutes waiver of implied warranty that property is in merchantable condition and suited for the purpose intended. Smith v. Northeast Ga. Fair Ass'n, 85 Ga. App. 32, 67 S.E.2d 836 (1951).
Where property is brought under implied warranty that it is reasonably suited to use intended, an acceptance by purchaser waives all defects discovered by the purchaser, or which, by the exercise of ordinary care and prudence, the purchaser might have discovered before delivery. Jones v. Knightstown Body Co., 52 Ga. App. 667, 184 S.E. 427 (1936); Wilkinson v. Rich's, Inc., 77 Ga. App. 239, 48 S.E.2d 552 (1948).
- Seller sued a buyer who rejected the seller's goods; the parties settled. As the parties' agreement was a contract to settle litigation, with any sale of goods merely incidental, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness, O.C.G.A. §§ 11-2-314 and11-2-315, did not apply to their settlement agreement. Ole Mexican Foods, Inc. v. Hanson Staple Co., 285 Ga. 288, 676 S.E.2d 169 (2009).
Medical center's furnishing of facility for use in connection with surgery to install a plate device to stabilize plaintiff's spine was a transaction involving "services and labor with an incidental furnishing of equipment and materials" and, as such, the Uniform Commercial Code had no application. McCombs v. Southern Regional Medical Ctr., Inc., 233 Ga. App. 676, 504 S.E.2d 747 (1998).
- Patient who died after taking medicine which a pharmaceutical manufacturer gave to the doctor and which the doctor gave to the patient was not entitled to an extension of any implied warranty existing between the manufacturer and the doctor, and the appellate court upheld the trial court's judgment dismissing claims the patient's spouse filed against the manufacturer, alleging breach of express and implied warranties, but reversed the trial court's judgment dismissing the husband's claims against the manufacturer alleging strict liability and negligent failure to warn. Bryant v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., 262 Ga. App. 401, 585 S.E.2d 723 (2003).
- Medical Device Amendments, 21 U.S.C. § 360k, preempted state law claims in a products liability case alleging an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose under O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 with respect to a precision spinal cord stimulator medical device. Horn v. Boston Sci. Neuromodulation Corp., F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Ga. Aug. 26, 2011).
- No breach of implied warranty could be shown after undisputed evidence demonstrated that the sellers' representation at the time of sale that a horse would be a good show horse was true. Sheffield v. Darby, 244 Ga. App. 437, 535 S.E.2d 776 (2000).
- Trial court did not err in granting a seller's motion for summary judgment in a customer's action seeking to recover damages for injuries the customer sustained when the customer was burned from a ceramic, scented-oil burner and alleging, among other things, that the seller breached the seller's duty of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose because there was no evidence that the seller's employees knew that the customer intended to use the product in any way other than its ordinary purpose, burning scented oil; the customer utilized the ceramic burner for the ordinary purpose for which the item was intended, i.e., using the receptacle on the item to hold scented oil over a burning candle, causing the scent to diffuse throughout the customer's home. Rivers v. H. S. Beauty Queen, Inc., 306 Ga. App. 866, 703 S.E.2d 416 (2010).
- It was undisputed that the defendant knew the plaintiff would be using the heat-treated pallets to ship products overseas and it was similarly undisputed that plaintiff specifically requested certain heat-treated pallets and that the pallets supplied by the defendant met these specifications; however, it was also undisputed that the plaintiff did not specify any particular moisture content for the pallets the plaintiff ordered. There was conflicting evidence in the record as to whether the plaintiff requested green or raw wood or whether the defendant decided unilaterally to use green wood; accordingly, as there was a question of fact as to whether the plaintiff relied on the defendant's skill and judgment to supply it with pallets with appropriate moisture content for shipping products overseas in freight containers and whether the defendant failed to do so, summary judgment was inappropriate on the implied warranties claim. Kraft Reinsurance Ir., Ltd. v. Pallets Acquisitions, LLC, F. Supp. 2d (N.D. Ga. Sept. 30, 2011).
Cited in Bell v. Menzies, 110 Ga. App. 436, 138 S.E.2d 731 (1964); Hill Aircraft & Leasing Corp. v. Simon, 122 Ga. App. 524, 177 S.E.2d 803 (1970); Security Dev. & Inv. Co. v. Ben O'Callaghan Co., 125 Ga. App. 526, 188 S.E.2d 238 (1972); Avery v. Aladdin Prods. Div., Nat'l Serv. Indus., Inc., 128 Ga. App. 266, 196 S.E.2d 357 (1973); Smith v. Bruce, 129 Ga. App. 97, 198 S.E.2d 697 (1973); Evershine Prods., Inc. v. Schmitt, 130 Ga. App. 34, 202 S.E.2d 228 (1973); Mays v. Citizens & S. Nat'l Bank, 132 Ga. App. 602, 208 S.E.2d 614 (1974); Parzini v. Center Chem. Co., 134 Ga. App. 414, 214 S.E.2d 700 (1975); Weaver v. Ralston Motor Hotel, Inc., 135 Ga. App. 536, 218 S.E.2d 260 (1975); Key v. Bagen, 136 Ga. App. 373, 221 S.E.2d 234 (1975); Lancaster v. Eberhardt, 141 Ga. App. 534, 233 S.E.2d 880 (1977); Caldwell v. Lord & Taylor, Inc., 142 Ga. App. 137, 235 S.E.2d 546 (1977); Hutchinson Homes, Inc. v. Guerdon Indus., Inc., 143 Ga. App. 664, 239 S.E.2d 553 (1977); Farmers Mut. Exch. of Baxley, Inc. v. Dixon, 146 Ga. App. 663, 247 S.E.2d 124 (1978); Transart Indus., Inc. v. Gaines-American Moulding Corp., 148 Ga. App. 363, 251 S.E.2d 384 (1978); Ramsey Brick Sales Co. v. Outlaw, 152 Ga. App. 37, 262 S.E.2d 227 (1979); Patron Aviation, Inc. v. Teledyne Indus., Inc., 154 Ga. App. 13, 267 S.E.2d 274 (1980); Corbett v. North Fla. Clarklift, Inc., 155 Ga. App. 701, 272 S.E.2d 563 (1980); Rigdon v. Walker Sales & Serv., Inc., 161 Ga. App. 459, 288 S.E.2d 711 (1982); Salome v. First Nat'l Bank, 162 Ga. App. 394, 291 S.E.2d 452 (1982); W.B. Anderson Feed & Poultry Co. v. Georgia Gas Distribs., Inc., 164 Ga. App. 96, 296 S.E.2d 395 (1982); Atlanta Cutlery Corp. v. Queen Cutlery Co., 168 Ga. App. 584, 309 S.E.2d 691 (1983); Alterman Foods, Inc. v. G.C.C. Beverages, Inc., 168 Ga. App. 921, 310 S.E.2d 755 (1983); Citizens Jewelry Co. v. Walker, 178 Ga. App. 897, 345 S.E.2d 106 (1986); Hill v. Jay Pontiac, Inc., 191 Ga. App. 258, 381 S.E.2d 417 (1989); Cobb County Sch. Dist. v. MAT Factory, Inc., 215 Ga. App. 697, 452 S.E.2d 140 (1994); Imex Int'l v. Wires Eng'g, 261 Ga. App. 329, 583 S.E.2d 117 (2003).
- Under warranty provisions of Uniform Commercial Code where a product is sold which is to be installed by consumer, written instructions that accompany it create implied warranty that it will be fit for ordinary purpose for which it is used and will be safely operable when installed in accordance with such directions. Reddick v. White Consol. Indus., Inc., 295 F. Supp. 243 (S.D. Ga. 1968).
If a manufacturer furnishes instructions as to manner in which product is to be used, consumer is entitled to think that so used it will not injure the consumer and there is implied warranty that goods are fit for that particular use. Reddick v. White Consol. Indus., Inc., 295 F. Supp. 243 (S.D. Ga. 1968).
A manufacturer furnishing instructions for use of product is warranting same for that particular purpose and use, and no other. This is especially true where appliance sold becomes dangerous if used improperly. Reddick v. White Consol. Indus., Inc., 295 F. Supp. 243 (S.D. Ga. 1968).
- Seller was not liable for consequential damages resulting from alleged breach of warranty arising from defects in its goods where seller's written warranty specifically limited any liability to repairing or replacing any defective goods and where buyer had notice of the existence of the written warranty but never requested or saw a copy of the written warranty. A-Larms, Inc. v. Alarms Device Mfg. Co., 165 Ga. App. 382, 300 S.E.2d 311 (1983).
- It would appear from a literal reading of O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 that it was intended to apply only to "sales" and not leases. Redfern Meats, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 134 Ga. App. 381, 215 S.E.2d 10 (1975).
- Warranty provisions of Uniform Commercial Code are applicable to those chattel leases where transaction in question is analogous to a sale. Redfern Meats, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 134 Ga. App. 381, 215 S.E.2d 10 (1975).
- Provisions of O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 are not applicable to all commercial chattel leases. Redfern Meats, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 134 Ga. App. 381, 215 S.E.2d 10 (1975).
O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 is not applicable to commercial chattel leases, and lessor may exculpate liability with a disclaimer clause, as long as the disclaimer is expressed in clear and unambiguous language. Petroziello v. United States Leasing Corp., 176 Ga. App. 858, 338 S.E.2d 63 (1985).
- Where owner contracted irrevocably to transfer ownership to another at some time in the future, the transaction was analogous to sale even though in the form of a lease and even though the owner retained title, the implied warranties of O.C.G.A. § 11-2-315 applied. Redfern Meats, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 134 Ga. App. 381, 215 S.E.2d 10 (1975).
- Where a lessee leased a vehicle for four years, title remained with the assignee, and the lessee was required to surrender the car at the expiration of the lease term, there being no option to purchase it, neither the implied warranty provisions nor the exclusion rules therefor of the Uniform Commercial Code applied to the lease agreement. Mark Singleton Buick, Inc. v. Taylor, 194 Ga. App. 630, 391 S.E.2d 435 (1990).
- For plaintiff to maintain action against manufacturer based on implied warranties, plaintiff must be purchaser either directly from manufacturer or from some other person such as a wholesaler or retailer. Whitaker v. Harvell-Kilgore Corp., 418 F.2d 1010 (5th Cir. 1969).
- Because the plaintiff established privity with respect to an express warranty claim against a drug manufacturer based upon affirmations of fact or promises to the decedent, the plaintiff also could bring claims for the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. Lee v. Mylan Inc., 806 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (M.D. Ga. Apr. 15, 2011).
Lack of privity between the manufacturer and user of exercise machine at a health club precluded the user's implied warranty claim against the manufacturer. Bodymaster Sports Indus., Inc. v. Wimberley, 232 Ga. App. 170, 501 S.E.2d 556 (1998).
- Whether or not warranty provisions of Uniform Commercial Code apply to lease of machinery, defense of breach of warranty cannot be raised by guarantor of debtor. Hurst v. Stith Equip. Co., 133 Ga. App. 374, 210 S.E.2d 851 (1974).
- Defendant may demonstrate in defense that product was in fact merchantable and fit for purpose intended, or that if there was a deficiency in such regard there was no causal connection between the breach and the damages sued for, or that some other factor was the sole proximate cause of the damage. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jackson Transp. Co., 126 Ga. App. 471, 191 S.E.2d 110 (1972).
Mere fact of tire blowout does not demonstrate manufacturer's negligence, nor tend to establish that tire was defective. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jackson Transp. Co., 126 Ga. App. 471, 191 S.E.2d 110 (1972).
- The distributor of an anti-psychotic drug could not be held liable for the suicide of a patient based on warranty claims because it neither manufactured nor prescribed the drug. Presto v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp., 226 Ga. App. 547, 487 S.E.2d 70 (1997).
- The manufacturer of an anti-psychotic drug could not be held liable for the suicide of a patient under any warranty claim because of the "learned intermediary" doctrine, absent some showing that the product itself was defective. Presto v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp., 226 Ga. App. 547, 487 S.E.2d 70 (1997).
Plaintiff's breach of warranty claims against a drug manufacturer, to the extent they were based upon failure to provide accurate or sufficient information regarding the use of the drug to the decedent, were barred by the learned intermediary doctrine, but the claims were not barred to the extent they were based upon failure to provide accurate or sufficient information regarding the use of the drug to others. Lee v. Mylan Inc., 806 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (M.D. Ga. Apr. 15, 2011).
- Where there was no evidence that the seller of re-treaded tires for a pick-up truck knew that it would be used in the owner's construction business, the seller was not liable to the owner based on breach of an implied warranty for a particular purpose. Jones v. Marcus, 217 Ga. App. 372, 457 S.E.2d 271 (1995).
- Where it was not shown that plaintiff relied on defendant manufacturer's skill and judgment in selecting the truck, or that, if plaintiff did, defendant knew of the reliance, plaintiff could not establish an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose under this section. Jenkins v. GMC, 240 Ga. App. 636, 524 S.E.2d 324 (1999).
- 38 Am. Jur. 2d, Guaranty, § 10. 63 Am. Jur. 2d, Products Liability, § 723 et seq. 67A Am. Jur. 2d, Sales, §§ 761-790.
6 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Commercial Code, § 2:264. 20A Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Commercial Code, § 57.
Implied Warranty of Fitness for Particular Purpose, 27 POF2d 243.
Misrepresentations in Sale of Animal, 35 POF2d 607.
Builder-Vendor's Liability to Purchaser of New Dwelling for Breach of Implied Warranty of Fitness or Habitability, 50 POF3d 543.
- 77A C.J.S., Sales, §§ 252, 253, 258 et seq.
- Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2-315.
- Implied warranty on sale of vessel, 3 A.L.R. 622.
Liability of seller of article not inherently dangerous for personal injuries to the buyer, due to the defective or dangerous condition of the article, 13 A.L.R. 1176; 74 A.L.R. 343; 168 A.L.R. 1054.
Warranties and conditions upon sale of seeds, nursery stock, etc., 16 A.L.R. 859; 32 A.L.R. 1241; 62 A.L.R. 451; 117 A.L.R. 470; 168 A.L.R. 581.
Loss of profits as elements of damages for fraud of seller, as to quality of goods purchased for resale, 28 A.L.R. 354.
Express or implied warranty on sale for accommodation of buyer, 32 A.L.R. 1150; 59 A.L.R. 1541.
Express or implied warranty of quality, condition, or fitness of automobile or truck sold by retailer dealer, 34 A.L.R. 535; 43 A.L.R. 648.
Implied warranty or condition as to quality of timber or lumber, 52 A.L.R. 1536.
Implied warranty of fitness on sale of article by trademark, tradename, or other particular description, 59 A.L.R. 1180; 90 A.L.R. 410.
Implied warranty of strength or fitness of chain, cable, or wire, 59 A.L.R. 1235.
Express or implied warranty on sale for accommodation, 59 A.L.R. 1541.
Construction and effect of express or implied warranty on sale of an article intended for use as an explosive, 62 A.L.R. 1510.
Liability of manufacturer or packer of defective article for injury to person or property of ultimate consumer who purchased from middleman, 105 A.L.R. 1502; 111 A.L.R. 1239; 140 A.L.R. 191; 142 A.L.R. 1490.
Implied warranty by retailer of cosmetics, 131 A.L.R. 123.
Warranty of title by seller in conditional sale contract, 132 A.L.R. 338.
Construction and application of provision in conditional sale contract regarding implied warranties, 139 A.L.R. 1276.
Implied warranty, by other than packer, of fitness of goods sold in sealed cans, 142 A.L.R. 1434.
Implied warranty of reasonable fitness of food for human consumption as breached by substance natural to the original product and not removed in processing, 143 A.L.R. 1421.
Implied warranty of quality, condition, or fitness on sale of secondhand article, 151 A.L.R. 446.
Seller's advertisements as affecting rights of parties to sale of personal property, 158 A.L.R. 1413.
Law of sales and liability in respect thereof as applied to transactions in self-service stores, 163 A.L.R. 238.
Intervening purchaser's knowledge of defects in or danger of article, or failure to inspect therefor, as affecting liability of manufacturer or dealer for personal injury or property damage to subsequent purchaser or other third person, 164 A.L.R. 371.
Assignability of warranty of goods and chattels, 17 A.L.R.2d 1196.
Seller's or manufacturer's liability for injuries as affected by buyer's or user's allergy or unusual susceptibility to injury from article, 26 A.L.R.2d 963.
Recovery by contractor or artisan, suing for breach of warranty, of damages for loss of good will occasioned by use in his business of unfit materials, 28 A.L.R.2d 591.
Measure and elements of recovery of buyer rescinding sale of domestic animal for seller's breach of warranty, 35 A.L.R.2d 1273.
Form and substance of notice which buyer of goods must give in order to recover damages for seller's breach of warranty, 53 A.L.R.2d 270.
Implied warranty of fitness on sale of livestock, 53 A.L.R.2d 892.
What law governs liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by product sold, 76 A.L.R.2d 130.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by food or food product sold, 77 A.L.R.2d 7.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by beverage sold, 77 A.L.R.2d 215.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by automobile or other vehicle, aircraft, boat, or their parts, supplies, or equipment, 78 A.L.R.2d 460; 81 A.L.R.3d 318; 97 A.L.R.3d 627; 1 A.L.R.4th 411; 3 A.L.R.4th 489; 5 A.L.R.4th 483.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by industrial, business, or farm machinery, tools, equipment, or materials, 78 A.L.R.2d 594; 2 A.L.R.4th 262.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by paint, cement, lumber, building supplies, ladders, small tools, and like products, 78 A.L.R.2d 696; 84 A.L.R.3d 877.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by toys, games, athletic or sports equipment, or like products, 78 A.L.R.2d 738; 95 A.L.R.3d 390.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by firearms, explosives, and flammables, 80 A.L.R.2d 488; 94 A.L.R.3d 291; 15 A.L.R.4th 909; 18 A.L.R.4th 206.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by household and domestic machinery, appliances, furnishings, and equipment, 80 A.L.R.2d 598; 89 A.L.R.3d 210; 93 A.L.R.3d 99; 1 A.L.R.4th 748.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for injury caused by clothing, shoes, combs, and similar products, 80 A.L.R.2d 702.
Liability of auctioneer or clerk to buyer as to title, condition, or quality of property sold, 80 A.L.R.2d 1237.
Products liability: manufacturer's responsibility for defective component supplied by another and incorporated in product, 3 A.L.R.3d 1016.
Contributory negligence or assumption of risk as defense to action for personal injury, death, or property damage resulting from alleged breach of implied warranty, 4 A.L.R.3d 501.
Statute of limitations: when cause of action arises on action against manufacturer or seller of product causing injury or death, 4 A.L.R.3d 821.
Seller's duty to test or inspect as affecting his liability for product-caused injury, 6 A.L.R.3d 12.
Products liability: extension of strict liability in tort to permit recovery by a third person who was neither a purchaser nor user of product, 33 A.L.R.3d 415.
Application of warranty provisions of Uniform Commercial Code to bailments, 48 A.L.R.3d 668.
Liability for injury or death of pallbearer, 48 A.L.R.3d 1280.
Liability of hospital or medical practitioner under doctrine of strict liability in tort, or breach of warranty, for harm caused by drug, medical instrument, or similar device used in treating patient, 54 A.L.R.3d 258.
Products liability: product as unreasonably dangerous or unsafe under doctrine of strict liability in tort, 54 A.L.R.3d 352.
Liability of water supplier for damages resulting from furnishing impure water, 54 A.L.R.3d 936.
Products liability: proof, under strict tort liability doctrine, that defect was present when product left hands of defendant, 54 A.L.R.3d 1079.
Liability of builder or subcontractor for insufficiency of building resulting from latent defects in materials used, 61 A.L.R.3d 792.
Contracts for artificial insemination of cattle, 61 A.L.R.3d 811.
Liability of installer or maintenance company for injury caused by door of automatic passenger elevator, 64 A.L.R.3d 1005.
Statements on container that enclosed toy, game, sports equipment, or the like, is safe as affecting manufacturer's liability for injury caused by product sold, 74 A.L.R.3d 1298.
Products liability: liability for injury or death allegedly caused by defective tire, 81 A.L.R.3d 318.
Products liability: liability for injury or death allegedly caused by defect in snowmobile or other recreational-purpose vehicle, 81 A.L.R.3d 394; 66 A.L.R.4th 622.
Products liability: liability for injury or death allegedly caused by defect in mobile home or trailer, 81 A.L.R.3d 421.
Uniform Commercial Code: implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose as including fitness for ordinary use, 83 A.L.R.3d 656.
What constitutes "particular purpose" within meaning of UCC § 2-315 dealing with implied warranty of fitness, 83 A.L.R.3d 669.
Liability of manufacturer, seller, or installer for personal injury caused by door glass, 84 A.L.R.3d 877.
Liability of manufacturer or seller for personal injury or property damage caused by television set, 89 A.L.R.3d 210.
Practices forbidden by state deceptive trade practice and consumer protection acts, 89 A.L.R.3d 449.
Elements and measure of damages for breach of warranty in sale of horse, 91 A.L.R.3d 419.
Products liability: stoves, 93 A.L.R.3d 99.
Products liability: modern cases determining whether product is defectively designed, 96 A.L.R.3d 22.
Products liability: defective vehicular gasoline tanks, 96 A.L.R.3d 265.
Liability of packer, foodstore, or restaurant for causing trichinosis, 96 A.L.R.3d 451.
Products liability: personal injury or death allegedly caused by defect in aircraft or its parts, supplies, or equipment, 97 A.L.R.3d 627.
Products liability: defective heating equipment, 1 A.L.R.4th 748.
Products liability: industrial accidents involving conveyor belts or systems, 2 A.L.R.4th 262.
Construction and effect of new motor vehicle warranty limiting manufacturer's liability to repair or replacement of defective parts, 2 A.L.R.4th 576.
Liability of manufacturer or seller of snowthrower for injuries to user, 2 A.L.R.4th 1284.
Products liability: defective vehicular windows, 3 A.L.R.4th 489.
Products liability: farm machinery, 4 A.L.R.4th 13.
Products liability: glue and other adhesive products, 7 A.L.R.4th 155.
Products liability: elevators, 7 A.L.R.4th 852.
Products liability: stud guns, staple guns, or parts thereof, 8 A.L.R.4th 70; 33 A.L.R.4th 1189.
Products liability: transformer and other electrical equipment, 10 A.L.R.4th 854.
Products liability: fertilizers, insecticides, pesticides, fungicides, weedkillers, and the like, or articles used in application thereof, 12 A.L.R.4th 462.
Products liability: cranes and other lifting apparatuses, 13 A.L.R.4th 476.
Extent of liability of seller of livestock infected with communicable disease, 14 A.L.R.4th 1096.
Products liability: cement and concrete, 15 A.L.R.4th 1186.
Products liability: firefighting equipment, 19 A.L.R.4th 326.
Liability of hospital, physician, or other individual medical practitioner for injury or death resulting from blood transfusion, 20 A.L.R.4th 136.
Liability of blood supplier or donor for injury or death resulting from blood transfusion, 24 A.L.R.4th 508.
Products liability: household appliances relating to cleaning, washing, personal care, and water supply, quality, and disposal, 34 A.L.R.4th 95.
Products liability: household equipment relating to storage, preparation, cooking, and disposal of food, 35 A.L.R.4th 663.
Products liability: home and office furnishings, 36 A.L.R.4th 170.
Computer sales and leases: breach of warranty, misrepresentation, or failure of consideration as defense or ground for affirmative relief, 37 A.L.R.4th 110.
Applicability of warranty of fitness under UCC § 2-325 to supplies or equipment used in performance of service contract, 47 A.L.R.4th 238.
Products liability: personal soap, 54 A.L.R.4th 574.
Liability of successor corporation for punitive damages for injury caused by predecessor's product, 55 A.L.R.4th 166.
Products liability: sufficiency of evidence to support product misuse defense in actions concerning lawnmowers, 55 A.L.R.4th 1062.
Products liability: toxic shock syndrome, 59 A.L.R.4th 50.
Products liability: building and construction lumber, 61 A.L.R.4th 121.
Liability of manufacturer of oral live polio (Sabin) vaccine for injury or death from its administration, 66 A.L.R.4th 83.
Liability for injury incurred in operation of power golf cart, 66 A.L.R.4th 622.
Products liability: industrial refrigerator equipment, 72 A.L.R.4th 90.
Products liability: scaffolds and scaffolding equipment, 74 A.L.R.4th 904.
Products liability: tractors, 75 A.L.R.4th 312.
Products liability: bicycles and accessories, 76 A.L.R.4th 117.
Products liability: exercise and related equipment, 76 A.L.R.4th 145.
Products liability: trampolines and similar devices, 76 A.L.R.4th 171.
Products liability: competitive sports equipment, 76 A.L.R.4th 201.
Products liability: skiing equipment, 76 A.L.R.4th 256.
Products liability: general recreational equipment, 77 A.L.R.4th 1121.
Products liability: mechanical amusement rides and devices, 77 A.L.R.4th 1152.
Products liability: lubricating products and systems, 80 A.L.R.4th 972.
Liability for injury or death allegedly caused by spoilage or contamination of beverage, 87 A.L.R.4th 804.
Liability for injury or death allegedly caused by foreign substance in beverage, 90 A.L.R.4th 12.
Liability for injury or death allegedly caused by foreign object in food or food product, 1 A.L.R.5th 1.
Liability for injury or death allegedly caused by spoilage, contamination, or other deleterious condition of food or food product, 2 A.L.R.5th 1.
Liability for injury or death allegedly caused by food product containing object related to, but not intended to be present in, product, 2 A.L.R.5th 189.
Products liability: roofs and roofing materials, 3 A.L.R.5th 851.
Products liability: cigarettes and other tobacco products, 36 A.L.R.5th 541.
Validity, construction, and application of computer software licensing agreements, 38 A.L.R.5th 1.
Products liability: theatrical equipment and props, 42 A.L.R.5th 699.
Liability on implied warranties in sale of used motor vehicle, 47 A.L.R.5th 677.
Causes of action governed by limitations period in UCC § 2-725, 49 A.L.R.5th 1.
Construction and application of learned-intermediary doctrine, 57 A.L.R.5th 1.
Products liability: computer hardware and software, 59 A.L.R.5th 461.
Products liability: liability for injury or death allegedly caused by defect in mobile home or trailer, 61 A.L.R.5th 473.
Products liability: swimming pools and accessories, 65 A.L.R.5th 105.
Products liability: paints, stains, and similar products, 69 A.L.R.5th 137.
Products liability: helicopters, 72 A.L.R.5th 299.
Products liability: consumer expectations test, 73 A.L.R.5th 75.
Products liability: ladders, 81 A.L.R.5th 245.
Total Results: 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2009-04-28
Citation: 676 S.E.2d 169, 285 Ga. 288, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 1483, 68 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 607, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 142
Snippet: Article 2. OCGA §§ 11-2-314 (merchantability), 11-2-315 (fitness for a particular purpose). "Article 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1985-01-09
Citation: 324 S.E.2d 462, 253 Ga. 698, 40 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 408, 1985 Ga. LEXIS 554
Snippet: seller for which the goods are required. OCGA § 11-2-315. Under the facts of this case the two may be treated