 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Curl v. Volkswagen of America12/2/2005
aimed at suppliers, warrantors, and service contractors. A "supplier" is "any person engaged in the business of making a consumer product directly or indirectly available to consumers." Section 2301(4), Title 15, U.S.Code. This broad definition includes any party in the chain of production and distribution regardless of privity. Abraham v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. (1986), 795 F.2d 238, 247. A warrantor is "any supplier or other person who gives or offers to give a written warranty or who is or may be obligated under an implied warranty." Section 2301(5), Title 15, U.S.Code. Volkswagen would fall within the MMWA's definitions of supplier and warrantor.
{ } Appellee would have a private right of action against Volkswagen for breach of warranty pursuant to Section 2310(d)(1), Title 15, U.S.Code, which provides that "a consumer who is damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation under * a written warranty, implied warranty, or service contract, may bring suit for damages and other legal and equitable relief[.]"
{ } Nothing in the MMWA requires that a consumer product be warranted. However, if a written warranty is made, the supplier may not disclaim or modify any implied warranty with respect to the product; provided, however, that implied warranties "may be limited in duration to the duration of a written warranty of reasonable duration, if such limitation is conscionable and is set forth in clear and unmistakable language and prominently displayed on the face of the warranty." Section 2308(b), Title 15, U.S.Code.
{ } "Implied warranty" means any implied warranty arising under state law in connection with the sale by a supplier of a consumer product. Section 2301(7), Title 15, U.S.Code.
{ } Appellee claimed Volkswagen breached its implied warranty of merchantability under the MMWA. This implied warranty is found in R.C. 1302.27(A), which provides that "a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind." Goods, to be merchantable, "must be at least such as * are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used[.]" R.C. 1302.27(B)(3). A "merchant" is defined in R.C. 1302.01(A)(5), as "a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by the person's occupation holds the person out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction *."
{ } In the current case, Volkswagen would meet the definition of a merchant. Nonetheless, Volkswagen asserts that it is not liable under an implied warranty because it was not a party to the sales contract between Stadium and appellee, and further was not in "privity" with appellee. Volkswagen claims that Ohio law requires a manufacturer to be in privity with the purchaser in order for a claim of breach of implied warranty to be valid.
{ } Ohio courts have often discussed the issue of privity, or lack thereof, between manufacturers and purchasers, arising from claims of breach of express and implied warranties, relating to defective products. The actions filed by purchasers have sounded in contract, tort, and strict liability. Courts have struggled to distinguish cases where the defective product resulted in personal injury , property damage, and economic loss.
{ } One of the earlier cases, before the enactment of the U.C.C., was Wood v. General Electric Co. (1953), 159 Ohio St. 273, overruled in part by Lonzrick v. Republic Steel Corp. (1966), 6 Ohio St.2d 227. In Wood, the purchasers of an electric blanket that caught fire and partially burned their residence sued the manufacturer claim
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|