The Multistate Essay Examination (MEE) frequently tests knowledge of sales law, and the warranty of merchantability is a cornerstone of that area. This post analyzes past MEE questions touching upon this crucial concept, providing insights into how the examiners approach this topic and how you can best prepare for similar questions on future exams. Understanding the nuances of the warranty of merchantability is critical for success on the MEE.
What is the Warranty of Merchantability?
Before diving into past questions, let's briefly define the warranty of merchantability. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a merchant who regularly deals in goods of a particular kind automatically warrants that the goods sold are merchantable. This means the goods must meet certain standards, including:
- Pass without objection in the trade under the contract description: The goods must meet the description in the sales contract.
- In the case of fungible goods, are of fair average quality within the description: If the goods are interchangeable (like bushels of wheat), they must be of average quality.
- Are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used: This is a key element. The goods must be fit for their typical use.
- Run, within the variations permitted by the agreement, of even kind, quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved: The goods should be consistent in quality and quantity.
- Are adequately contained, packaged, and labeled as the agreement may require: Proper packaging and labeling are essential.
- Conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label if any: Statements on the packaging must be true.
Analyzing Past MEE Questions (Hypothetical Examples)
While specific MEE questions aren't publicly released in their entirety, we can construct hypothetical examples mirroring common themes:
Hypothetical Example 1: The Defective Widget
A buyer purchases 100 widgets from a merchant who regularly deals in widgets. 50 of the widgets are defective and unusable for their intended purpose. The buyer sues for breach of warranty. Discuss the elements of a breach of the warranty of merchantability claim and whether the buyer is likely to succeed.
Analysis: This question tests the understanding of the "fit for ordinary purposes" element. The defective widgets clearly fail this requirement, leading to a likely successful claim. The fact that the seller is a merchant automatically triggers the implied warranty of merchantability.
Hypothetical Example 2: The Mislabeled Food Product
A food processing company sells jars of jam labeled as "strawberry." However, the jam contains a significant amount of apple filling. A buyer purchases the jam and suffers an allergic reaction due to the undisclosed apple content. Analyze the buyer's potential claims under the UCC.
Analysis: This scenario highlights the "adequately labeled" and "conform to promises on the label" aspects. The mislabeling constitutes a breach of the warranty of merchantability. The buyer could also pursue a claim for breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose if they communicated their allergy to the seller.
Hypothetical Example 3: The Used Car Lemon
A used car dealer sells a used car to a buyer. The car breaks down repeatedly due to significant pre-existing mechanical issues. The buyer sues claiming breach of the implied warranty of merchantability. Discuss the dealer's potential defenses.
Analysis: This scenario explores the application of the warranty of merchantability to used goods. While a used car doesn't have to be perfect, it must be fit for its ordinary purpose. The dealer's defense might center on whether the defects were readily apparent (as-is clause), or whether the buyer received adequate notice of the condition. The question tests understanding of what constitutes "merchantability" within the context of used goods.
Preparing for MEE Questions on Warranty of Merchantability
To effectively prepare for MEE questions on the warranty of merchantability, focus on:
- Understanding the UCC: Thorough knowledge of Article 2 of the UCC is essential.
- Identifying the merchant: Determine if the seller is a merchant as this is a crucial element for the implied warranty of merchantability.
- Analyzing the facts: Carefully examine the facts to determine if the goods meet the six requirements of merchantability.
- Applying the law to the facts: This is the most critical step in answering any MEE question.
- Practicing with past questions (and hypotheticals): The more you practice, the better prepared you'll be.
By focusing on these key areas and practicing with hypothetical scenarios similar to those discussed above, you can significantly improve your chances of success on MEE questions related to the warranty of merchantability. Remember, understanding the nuances of this crucial warranty is key to passing the MEE.
