unmerchantability

the court ruled that the defective products constituted unmerchantability under the uniform commercial code.

plaintiffs alleged unmerchantability of the goods delivered, claiming they failed basic quality standards.

the warranty against unmerchantability protects consumers from purchasing worthless or defective items.

defense attorneys challenged the plaintiff's proof of unmerchantability in the product liability case.

the doctrine of unmerchantability has evolved significantly through recent commercial law jurisprudence.

economic analysis helped establish the unmerchantability of the contaminated agricultural shipments.

contract law establishes clear standards for determining unmerchantability in interstate commerce disputes.

the jury found sufficient evidence of unmerchantability to support the breach of warranty claims.

sellers must ensure their products meet minimum quality requirements to avoid unmerchantability allegations.

legal scholars debate whether digital goods can ever satisfy traditional unmerchantability standards.

the plaintiff filed an action for unmerchantability seeking damages for the worthless merchandise received.

current precedent suggests that unmerchantability requires more than mere aesthetic defects in products.