(1) Incidental damages resulting from the seller’s breach include expenses reasonably
incurred in inspection, receipt, transportation and care and custody of goods rightfully
rejected, any commercially reasonable charges, expenses or commissions in connection
with effecting cover, and any other reasonable expense incident to the delay or other
breach.
(2) Consequential damages resulting from the seller’s breach include:
(a) Any loss resulting from general or particular requirements and needs of which the
seller at the time of contracting had reason to know and which could not reasonably
be prevented by cover or otherwise; and
(b) Injury to person or property proximately resulting from any breach of warranty.
Notes of Decisions
Saber v. Dan Angelone Chevrolet, Inc., 811 A.2d 644 (R.I. 2002).
“The cost and effort to repair the problems was relevant to a calculation of incidental and consequential damages under § 6A-2-715 in the event that liability was established.”
Bergenstock v. Lemay's G.M.C., Inc., 372 A.2d 69 (R.I. 1977).
· cites it 2× “Section 6A-2-715(2). The plaintiff’s appeal from the directed verdicts as to counts one and three, that is, revocation of acceptance and unjust enrichment, is denied and dismissed, the judgment appealed from insofar as it concerns these counts is affirmed.”
Plouffe v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 373 A.2d 492 (R.I. 1977).
“The plaintiffs argue, however, that in an action based on breach of warranty against the manufacturer of a product the statute of limitations as provided for in §6A-2-725, and not §9-1-14 should apply to actions by plaintiffs against such manufacturers.”
Dooley v. Parker-Hannifin Corp., 817 F. Supp. 245 (D.R.I. 1993).
· cites it 2× “Laws § 6A-2-313 (1992), and/or when the “seller” has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill and judgment to furnish suitable goods. See R.I.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 6A-2-715(2) — 1 case
Bergenstock v. Lemay's G.M.C., Inc., 372 A.2d 69 (R.I. 1977).
“Section 6A-2-715(2). The plaintiff’s appeal from the directed verdicts as to counts one and three, that is, revocation of acceptance and unjust enrichment, is denied and dismissed, the judgment appealed from insofar as it concerns these counts is affirmed.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 6A-2-715(2)(b) — 1 case
Dooley v. Parker-Hannifin Corp., 817 F. Supp. 245 (D.R.I. 1993).
“Laws § 6A-2-313 (1992), and/or when the “seller” has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill and judgment to furnish suitable goods. See R.I.”
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.