O.C.G.A.

11-2A-212 (2019)

Implied warranty of merchantability

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Except in a finance lease, a warranty that the goods will be merchantable is implied in a lease contract if the lessor is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind.

(2) Goods to be merchantable must be at least such as:

(a) Pass without objection in the trade under the description in the lease agreement;

(b) In the case of fungible goods, are of fair average quality within the description;

(c) Are fit for the ordinary purposes for which goods of that type are used;

(d) Run, within the variation permitted by the lease agreement, of even kind, quality, and quantity within each unit and among all units involved;

(e) Are adequately contained, packaged, and labeled as the lease agreement may require; and

(f) Conform to any promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label.

(3) Other implied warranties may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.

History

Code 1981, § 11-2A-212, enacted by Ga. L. 1993, p. 633, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Evidence of defect at time of lease. - A claim for breach of an implied warranty of merchantability concerning an air mattress and pump was untenable since the plaintiff failed to provide any evidence that the mattress was not working when received by plaintiff. Griffith v. Medical Rental Supply of Albany, Inc., 244 Ga. App. 120, 534 S.E.2d 859, 2000 Ga. App. LEXIS 640 (2000). Disclaimer inadequate. - A reason-

able person would not necessarily have noticed and understood that by the mere mention of “as is” in the context in which it appeared in a lease agreement, without any mention of any warranties or any disclaimers of warranties, he or she was agreeing to forego any rights to lease a piece of equipment in fit and suitable working condition. Bailey v. Tucker Equip. Sales, Inc., 236 Ga. App. 289, 510 S.E.2d 904, 1999 Ga. App. LEXIS 40 (1999).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2A-212.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1999–2000 · leading case: Griffith v. Med. Rental Supply of Albany, Georgia, Inc., 534 S.E.2d 859 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000).
Griffith v. Med. Rental Supply of Albany, Georgia, Inc., 534 S.E.2d 859 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “In this action regarding the alleged breach of an implied warranty of merchantability (OCGA § 11-2A-212) and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose (OCGA § 11-2A-213) concerning an air mattress and pump, Earl Griffith, in his individual capacity and as executor…”
Bailey v. Tucker Equip. Sales, Inc., 510 S.E.2d 904 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “Bailey asked the court to find that the express terms in paragraph 5 were not effective to disclaim the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness under OCGA §§ 11-2A-212; 11-2A-213 because the language was not conspicuous.”
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.