Question

Bob has plans to camp overnight near Mt. Washington, the highest peak in the northeast, in January. Temperatures in that part of the White Mountains, routinely are well below zero, without wind chill. Bob knows he will need a sleeping bag, but has limited funds to purchase a sleeping bag.

In August he travels to LL Bean, Freeport, Maine to purchase a sleeping bag. Bob makes his way to the bag section and without consulting with store employees, selects a bag, primarily because of the bright color and low price. The bag is rated as "warm" down to 40 degrees above zero (F). He pays for the bag, without discussing the purchase with the cashier, or why or when he plans to use the bag.

He goes to Mt. Washington, in January, camps out and the temperature drops to 20 below (F), with wind chill -45 F. It is the first time he has used the bag and he suffers severe frostbite on his toes, necessitating the amputation of five toes.

Bob would like to sue LL Bean for the loss of his toes. His theory is that the bag "should have" protected him from the cold. Based upon the given facts, please discuss the merits of his suit. Is it likely that the suit succeed, why or why not?

Be sure to cite the proper section of the UCC that supports your answer. Hint: Review the sections in UCC 2-301, et al.

# 2: Now consider that Bob discussed his plans with the sleeping bag salesperson at LL Bean. He specifically told the sales associate that he needed a bag for the camping trip tp Mt Washington in January. The salesperson told him that the 40 degree bag was the best choice.   Does this change your analysis of the merits of the law suit? Why or why not?

Answer 1

#1.

The suit filed by Bob is not likely to succeed because

• the UCC 2-301 section states that the seller's obligation is to transfer and deliver and the buyers obligation is to pay and accept as per the terms of contract.
• When Bob visited the store, he bought the sleeping bag by seeing that it is low cost
• Bob did not enquire into the properties of the product he was purchasing and whether the product will serve the purpose or not.
• And as per Bob's theory of sleeping bag "should have" protected him from the cold, had Bob been in the temperature zone as mentioned in the product "40 degrees above zero (F), the sleeping bag would have served its purpose.

#2.

Given that Bob had discussed his need of the sleeping bag with the sales person at LL Bean and the sales person still suggested the 40 degree bag as the best choice, the analysis of the law suit filed by Bob changes.

Under UCC, The Implied warranty of fitness states that the seller knows the consumer is buying the product for a specific purpose and that the consumer id depending on the skills and judgement of the salesperson, but still the product does not fulfill the purpose.

Bob can use the implied warranty of fitness in his suit, because he bought the sleeping bag on the salesperson's recommendation and succeed in his suit.