Multiple Choice
Which of the following best expresses the court's ruling 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 eaten by the plaintiff?
A) That the plaintiff could recover based upon the implied warranty of merchantability because even though bones are not a foreign substance in fish,they are not expected in small pieces of tuna fish.
B) That the plaintiff could not recover because the bone was not a foreign substance to the fish and should have been expected.
C) That the plaintiff could not recover because no food has warranties attached to it.
D) That the plaintiff could recover based upon the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
E) That the plaintiff could recover based on an express warranty.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q2: List the circumstances under which an implied
Q69: The UCC assumes that the seller has
Q80: Which of the following is true regarding
Q81: Which of the following is true regarding
Q82: What was the court's ruling on appeal
Q84: What is one of the two ways
Q85: The UCC specifically permits buyers to recover
Q86: [Boat Tow] Ryan went to a new
Q88: Unless the seller proves otherwise,the UCC assumes
Q89: Which is a true statement regarding a