Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0200 ; ~ ~ Firescone ori the impli~d warranty provisions of thc~ L~niforn: Commer- cial Caie 672. 2-314~ Florida Sratutes 1967). The w:~rranty 5ou~ht to be invoked in count five is a contractual warranty of inerchantability of goods which in the language of the statute is implied in a contract • for thcir sale. We do not construe the sales warranty provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code as gove.rning the rights and duties " between a user of the goods and a remote manufacturer with whom the user has no privity of a contract, See Ford Motor Co, v. Pittman, - 227 So. 2ci 246 ( Fla. App. 1969); Schuessler v. Coca -Cola [iottling Co. ~ of Miami, 279 So. 2~ 90I (Fla. App. I973). Section 2-318 of the Uni- form Commercial Code 672. Z-318. Florida Statutes 1965) extended the benefits of the same warranty received by the buyer in a contract of sale tu members of the family or household or guests in the house of the buyer by des~g*?ating such persons as third party beneficiaries of the contract of sale. By amendment in 1967 the Florida legislature , added employees, servants and agents of the buyer to this group of third parc}• beneficiaries 672. 2-318, Florida Statutes 1967). In ar attempt ta•bring plaintiffs into this group of third party beneficiaries ; of the sale contract Uetween Ford and Sunris. , it is allegc:d in count i ~ five tr~at plaintiffs were employees of an agent of Sunrise and as sucr. i ~ ~ were employec,i by the defendant Sunrise to mounr tires on wheel i ~ assembiv previo;3slv described. 1'his allegation is confusing since the ~ . . ; ~ ~ fact~ allc~ed fail to establish any agency retat;onshi~ between Sunrise t ! ~ and plaintiffs' empPoyer Goodyear nor any em~loyer-emptoyee rela- ~ . 3 ~ tior,ship between Sunrise ar.d plaintiffs. W`e affirm the trial court's ~ r ~ dismissal of count five of the complaint. ~ "l'he final judgmen: appealed from is affir:n:.~c; in part, reversc.~i ~ ir. p~rt ar,d rernanded to tre trial court for further proce~ding in accord- s ~ anc` wit~i rhis opinion. ~ ~ V~'At,DF~N and IX?W~EY, JJ. , concur. ~ ~AltR1NCTOh, OTiS, Associate Judge, c:oncurs in part, dissents in ~ pa rt. ~ ~ -7 - ~ ~ ° ~ OR ~ :s 60UK ~ pq~ n ~ k ~ ~ _ '~x. ~'e'-_.,, > a_ , _ - - . . . , . .,_.r