strollingbones
Diamond Member
Finally, the Appellate Division examined the plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty claims, which were controlled by the Uniform Commercial Code. First, the court determined that the plaintiffs had establish sufficient evidence to demonstrate a warranty by the defendant that the samosas it provided were vegetarian. However, “[a] more difficult issue” was posed by the plaintiffs’ claims of consequential damages, i.e., emotional/spiritual injury requiring purification of their souls in India. The Appellate Division noted that to prevail, the plaintiffs had to prove that those damages were reasonably foreseeable. Ultimately, the Appellate Division reasoned that “ecause discovery has not commenced in this matter, we cannot determine what consequential damages were foreseen at the time of the sale of the samosas in the event of a breach. We thus reverse summary judgment on plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty claim and remand for further proceedings.”
they are simply debating damages
they are simply debating damages