Multiple Choice
What was the result in the "Case Opener" in which a purchaser of a puppy from a person who regularly sold puppies sued the seller for veterinarian bills after the puppy was found to be in poor health?
A) The court found that the puppy was not a good covered under the UCC,and the plaintiff was denied recovery.
B) The court awarded the plaintiff the veterinary bills finding that the UCC applied and that the seller breached the warranty of merchantability.
C) The court refused any recovery to the plaintiff on the basis that the seller was not considered a merchant under the UCC and that no implied warranties were made.
D) The buyer in essence had no remedy because the court ruled that the plaintiff's only remedy,which the plaintiff was unwilling to do,was return of the puppy for a refund.
E) The court allowed the buyer to recover the contract price only,not veterinarian bills.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q65: If a written warranty is silent as
Q68: Which of the following is a true
Q69: A[n] _ is any description of the
Q70: If a buyer fails to comply with
Q71: According to the Magnuson-Moss Act,when the seller
Q72: Under common law,which warranty is the only
Q73: Perry and Tim negotiate a contract governed
Q74: The requires a seller who issues a
Q82: List the exceptions to title warranties.
Q83: Puffing generally creates an express warranty.