Sales and Leases | 191
Ordinary Purpose v. Particular Purpose In applying the implied warranty of merchantability, courts sometimes distinguish between (1) the goods’ ordinary purpose and (2) the buyer’s particular purpose in buying the goods. This approach is sound. The implied warranty of merchantability does not necessarily concern itself with whether the goods are fit for the buyer’s specific purpose. Rather, the warranty asks whether the goods are fit for the ordinary purpose for which goods of the kind are typically used. [ See Pappalardo v. Combat Sports, Inc. , No. 11–1320 (MLC), 2011 WL 6756949 (D. N.J. Dec. 23, 2011); 2 Hawkland UCC Series § 2-314:3, Westlaw (database updated June 2021).] Example : A Little League baseball promoter purchased a shipment of baseball bats from a manufacturer. For the bats to be suitable for use in Little League baseball, they needed a bat performance standard (BPS) of 1.5 or lower. Though bats with a BPS of higher than 1.5 were unsuitable for use in the Little Leagues, the bats were still perfectly fine for recreational play or batting practice. Shortly after taking delivery of the bats, the promoter realized that their BPS was above 1.5. Here, a court would likely hold that the bats were not unmerchantable, just because they were unfit for use in Little League baseball. That use was not the average, ordinary use of a baseball bat; rather, Little League use was the promoter’s specific purpose in buying the bats. A baseball bat’s ordinary purpose was simply to hit baseballs, and the bats here were still useful for that purpose. [ See Pappalardo v. Combat Sports, Inc. , No. 11–1320 (MLC), 2011 WL 6756949 (D. N.J. Dec. 23, 2011).] c. Running of Even Kind, Quantity, and Quality among All Units Involved and within EachUnit Again, for goods to be merchantable, they must run of even kind, quantity, and quality among all units involved and within each unit—with any variations that the agreement permits. This discrete prong of merchantability is not often discussed in the cases; most of the time, the requirement of fitness for the goods’ ordinary purpose takes center stage. On this point, though, the official comments to § 2-314 note that trade usage may permit substantial variations among or within units, even if the agreement’s express language does not. Thus, even if the goods substantially vary within or among units, they may be merchantable if a relevant trade usage contemplates the variation. [ See U.C.C. § 2-314, cmt. 9 (1951); 2 Hawkland UCC Series § 2-314:3, Westlaw (database updated June 2021).] d. Adequate Labeling, Packaging, and Containers For goods to be merchantable, they must feature any labeling, packaging, and containers that the contract requires, whether by express language or by any course of performance,
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker