St. Thomas Law Review
First Page
225
Document Type
Comment
Abstract
Imagine you are about to lose your home insurance after your provider contacted you stating that all homes with a pool are required to have a fence around the property. You quickly find a company that sells and installs fences and enter into a contract with them. You pay a fortune for the fence, but your insurance is saved. Shortly thereafter, the fence proves to be faulty, and the company refuses to fix the problem. Now, you sue under certain warranties that are provided by the Uniform Commercial Code ("U.C.C."), but the court finds that the U.C.C. does not apply to your dispute and that the warranty you wish to sue under is not available under common law. Although you argued that the U.C.C. applies to your case based on prior cases providing that the sale and installation of a fence falls under the U.C.C. as a sale of goods, the court disagrees and finds that the contract seems to be mainly for services, falling under common law. Should there be a better standard for the court to apply in sale of goods and services transactions or is it fair that you are barred from recovery when others in your situation have been able to recover based on similar facts? This comment begins by discussing the background of the U.C.C. and the predominant purpose doctrine in Part II. Part III of this comment examines the various tests courts have used to determine the governing law of a transaction. Further, Part III.a considers the method of separating the transaction Part III.b details the application of the U.C.C. to any mixed contract." Part III.c provides a discussion of the gravamen standard, which some courts use as their method of choice. Lastly, Part IV discusses the need for a uniform standard in these situations, provides a view of a recent case where the court developed an efficient set of factors to be applied, and argues how to make those factors even more effective in order to promote widespread adherence to one standard, which will create consistent and just outcomes in cases of tricky mixed transactions.
Recommended Citation
Austin Bodnar,
Mixed Transactions for Goods and Services: The Need for Consistency in Choosing the Governing Law,
27
St. Thomas L. Rev.
225
(2015).
Available at:
https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol27/iss2/5