Multiple Choice
Which of the following best expresses the court's opinion in the case nugget Jackson v.Bumble Bee Seafoods Inc.,in which the plaintiff sued after small fish bones were found in canned tuna fish the plaintiff ate?
A) That the plaintiff could not recover because the bone was not a foreign substance to the fish and should have been expected.
B) That the plaintiff could recover based upon the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
C) That the plaintiff could recover based on an express warranty.
D) That the plaintiff could recover based upon the implied warranty of merchantability because even through bones are not a foreign substance to fish, they are not expected in small pieces of tuna fish.
E) That the plaintiff could not recover because no food has warranties attached to it.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q8: A salespersons' exaggerations that would not be
Q9: Which of the following is the most
Q10: What is the effect of a failure
Q11: Is Donnie correct that the car was
Q14: Jack went into a hardware store to
Q15: Which of the following was the court's
Q16: Will Donnie likely be able to recover
Q17: An express warranty is any description of
Q73: Which of the following is true under
Q82: List the exceptions to title warranties.