Opinion ID: 1740395
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: limit of warranty and liability

Text: This company warrants that this product conforms to the chemical description on the label and is reasonably fit for the purposes set forth in the complete Directions for Use label booklet (Directions) when used in accordance with those Directions under the conditions described therein. . . . . . THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY OF THE USER OR BUYER AND THE LIMIT OF THE LIABILITY OF THIS COMPANY OR ANY OTHER SELLER FOR ANY AND ALL LOSSES, INJURIES OR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE USE OR HANDLING OF THIS PRODUCT (INCLUDING CLAIMS BASED IN CONTRACT NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, OTHER TORT OR OTHERWISE) SHALL BE THE PURCHASE PRICE PAID BY THE USER OR BUYER FOR THE QUANTITY OF THIS PRODUCT INVOLVED, OR, AT THE ELECTION OF THIS COMPANY OR ANY OTHER SELLER, THE REPLACEMENT OF SUCH QUANTITY, OR, IF NOT ACQUIRED BY PURCHASE, REPLACEMENT OF SUCH QUANTITY IN NO EVENT SHALL THIS COMPANY OR ANY OTHER SELLER BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. The buyer and all users are deemed to have accepted the terms of this LIMIT OF WARRANTY AND LIABILITY which may not be varied by any verbal or written agreement. (Emphasis added.) Monsanto's motion to dismiss focused principally upon the LIMIT OF WARRANTY AND LIABILITY section as a bar to recovery for consequential damages. [1] The main issue for consideration is whether the LIMIT OF WARRANTY AND LIABILITY set forth above bars recovery of consequential damages or, as whether as plaintiffs urge, such limit is unconscionable and thus unenforceable or is unenforceable because the limited remedy fails of its essential purpose.