Implied Warranty, Products Liability, and the Boundary Between Contract and Tort

Feinman, Jay M.

Journal: Washington University Law Review

Volume: 75

First Page: 469

Year: 1997

Bluebook Citation: 75 WASH. U. L. REV. 469 (1997)

Author: Jay M. Feinman: all 27 publications


Abstract

An unusual type of products liability case raises the issue of whether an injured consumer can recover for breach of an implied warranty of merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code when the product that causes the injury is not defective under the tort rules governing products liability. Only a small number of cases fit this pattern, because in the overwhelming majority of cases a product that is unmerchantable-that is, not fit for the ordinary purposes for which it is used-will also be "in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous," to use the widely followed language of section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. Nevertheless, this type of case illuminates the nature of liability in implied warranty and in products liability, the relationship between the two, the broader relationship between contract law and tort law, the wisdom of portions of the proposed Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability and of the proposed revision of Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, and the current politics of the legal process.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.