Opinion ID: 1656048
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Implied warranty for merchantability for an ordinary purpose

Text: ¶ 26. The Plaintiffs argue that, as reasonable consumers, they expected the casket to preserve the remains for an indefinite period of time. The Defendants contend that even if the Plaintiffs' theory that the ordinary purpose of the casket was to preserve the remains for an indefinite or some unknown period of time is accepted as true, there is no evidence in the record which indicates the remains were not in fact properly preserved for an indefinite or unknown period of time. When the remains were exhumed by the Plaintiffs approximately two and one-half years after burial, the record reflects the remains were preserved. The Plaintiffs present no claim that the remains had been damaged in any way by the cracks and separations. As such, the Defendants assert the Plaintiffs' alleged ordinary purpose of the casket was satisfied. ¶ 27. Furthermore, the Defendants contend that the Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that the casket selected was not merchantable or did not fulfill its ordinary purpose. In Craigmiles v. Giles, 110 F.Supp.2d 658, 662 (E.D.Tenn.2000), affd. 312 F.3d 220 (6th Cir.2002), which is cited by the Ott & Lee, the district court stated: A casket is nothing more than a container for human remains. Caskets are normally constructed of metal or wood, but can be made of other materials. Some have protective seals, but those seals do not prevent air and bacteria from exiting. All caskets leak sooner or later, and all caskets, like their contents, eventually decompose. ¶ 28. Likewise, Batesville contends the ordinary purpose of a wooden casket is to house the remains of the departed until interment. Batesville argues that ordinary purpose includes uses which the manufacturer intended and those which are reasonably foreseeable. See 77A C.J.S. Sales to Salvage § 256(b) (1994) (The ordinary purposes contemplated by the [Uniform Commercial] Code include both those uses which the manufacturer intended and those which are reasonably foreseeable.) Accordingly, Batesville asserts that it would not be reasonably foreseeable that any customer would expect a wooden casket to preserve the remains for an indefinite period of time as claimed by the Plaintiffs. ¶ 29. Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-314 (Rev. 2002) establishes the statutory foundation for the concept of an implied warranty for merchantability for an ordinary purpose. Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-314 provides in pertinent part: (1) Except as provided in subsection (5), a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind.... (2) Goods to be merchantable must be at least such as: (a) Pass without objection in the trade under the contract description; and (b) In the case of fungible goods, are of fair average quality within the description; and (c) Are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; and (d) Run, within the variations permitted by the agreement, of even kind, quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved; and (e) Are adequately contained, packaged and labeled as the agreement may require; and (f) Conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label if any. (3) Other implied warranties may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.    (5) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the express disclaimer or express modification of any implied warranties of merchantability.... (Emphasis added). ¶ 30. The trial court found that the ordinary purpose for which the casket was designed ceased once the pall bearers bore the casket from the hearse to the grave site for burial. [3] However, the record does not indicate that the Plaintiffs ever stated a specified period of time that they, as a reasonable customer, would have reasonably expected the wooden casket to last. The Plaintiffs contend that they reasonably expected the casket to protect the remains for an indefinite period of time. Indefinite is defined as without fixed boundaries or distinguishing characteristics; not definite, determinate, or precise. Black's Law Dictionary 393 (5th ed.1983). As previously stated, the record also fails to demonstrate that the remains were damaged in any way from the alleged cracks and separation when the casket and body were exhumed. Accordingly, we find the Plaintiffs' assignment of error is without merit.