Stella bought a cup of coffee at the Roasted Bean Drive-Thru. The coffee had been heated to 190 degrees and consequently had dissolved the inside of the cup. When Stella lifted the lid, the cup collapsed, spilling the contents on her lap. To recover for th


Yes, Stella can recover for a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.
An implied warranty of merchantability arises in every sale or lease of goods made by a merchant who deals in goods of the kind. Goods that are merchantable are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used. A sale of food or drink is a sale of goods. Merchantable food is food that is fit to eat or drink on the basis of consumer expectations. A consumer should reasonably expect hot coffee to be hot, but not to be so scalding that it causes third-degree burns.

Business

You might also like to view...

Below are the transactions for the Louisville Company: Proceeds from issuance of bonds payable $635,000 Payment to purchase equipment $275,000 Payment of wages $115,000 Payment of dividends $155,000 Payment to pay off notes payable $195,000 Based on these transactions, what is the net cash flow from financing activities?

a. $285,000 net cash provided by financing activities. b. $275,000 net cash used for financing activities. c. $0, because cash inflows equal cash outflows from financing activities. d. $440,000 net cash provided by financing activities.

Business

In some circumstances, placing a refusal in the first sentence is justified

Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Business

A person's background knowledge is not helpful is getting more meaning from a reading passage

Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Business

Karl bought a used car from Car City and he had constant problems with the car

Karl was so angry that he parked the car opposite Car City on his friend's parking lot and drew arrows on the car pointing to all the things that had gone wrong and words that said Car City sells rotten cars. If Car City sues Karl most likely a court would rule A) Karl is liable for product defamation B) Karl is liable for slander C) Karl is liable for trespass D) Karl is liable for breach of confidential information E) Karl has not nothing illegal

Business