Opinion ID: 2614864
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: breach of express and implied warranties

Text: Counts II and III of Swenson's complaint alleged breach of express and implied warranties. Swenson claims that the repairs requested by Swenson and the bill presented by Truckweld constituted a sales transaction within the definition of the Uniform Commercial Code. [14] The U.C.C. does not apply to this transaction. AS 45.05.046(a) (U.C.C. § 2106(a)) provides: In §§ 36-242 of this chapter,[ [15] ] unless the context otherwise requires, contract and agreement are limited to those relating to the present or future sale of goods. Contract for sale includes both a present sale of goods and a contract to sell goods at a future time. A sale consists in the passing of title from the seller to the buyer for a price (§ 126). A present sale means a sale which is accomplished by the making of the contract. [emphasis added] AS 45.05.094, .096, and .098, the Code's warranty provisions, expressly apply only to sales of goods. Truckweld was not a seller of the defective ram assembly. Since Swenson claims no other basis for relief on its theory of breach of warranty, summary judgment was appropriate.