Things to consider

來源: apt 2006-02-20 08:38:28 [] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀: 次 (1311 bytes)
Are you injured? If you are, you may have a case of implied warranty of merchantability. UCC 2-314 states that commerical goods must be fit or ordainry purposes. Most courts today are using consumer expectation test in which a rubber band is certainly beyond expectation of any reasonably prudent consumder. Minority courts use foreign/natural test, in which a rubber band is certainly not natural to lobster.

You will also have a case of negligence that you need to prove that the restaurant fell below due standard of care when preparing the lobster. Either way you have to prove damage. A pure emotional distress may be recoverable. In 1987 in Maryland, Yong Cha Hong dined out in a fired chicken restaurant, Roy Rogers, owed by Marriott Hotel. While eating the chicken she thought she was biting into a worm and got very upset by it and sued Marriott for half million dollars for breach of implied warranty, under UCC 2-314. Expert testified that the worm was probably a part of trachea or arota from the chicken's anatomy, which is very natural for fried chicken wings. The judge, however, denied summery judgment request by the defendant and permitted the case to go to jury.

I don't remember the outcome of that case but I suggest that you should talk a lawyer to find out more.
請您先登陸,再發跟帖!

發現Adblock插件

如要繼續瀏覽
請支持本站 請務必在本站關閉/移除任何Adblock

關閉Adblock後 請點擊

請參考如何關閉Adblock/Adblock plus

安裝Adblock plus用戶請點擊瀏覽器圖標
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安裝Adblock用戶請點擊圖標
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”