Question

Bob has plans to camp overnight near Mt. Washington, the highest peak in the northeast, in January. Temperatures in that part of the White Mountains, routinely are well below zero, without wind chill. Bob knows he will need a sleeping bag, but has limited funds to purchase a sleeping bag.

In August he travels to LL Bean, Freeport, Maine to purchase a sleeping bag. Bob makes his way to the bag section and without consulting with store employees, selects a bag, primarily because of the bright color and low price. The bag is rated as "warm" down to 40 degrees above zero (F). He pays for the bag, without discussing the purchase with the cashier, or why or when he plans to use the bag.

He goes to Mt. Washington, in January, camps out and the temperature drops to 20 below (F), with wind chill -45 F. It is the first time he has used the bag and he suffers severe frostbite on his toes, necessitating the amputation of five toes.

Bob would like to sue LL Bean for the loss of his toes. His theory is that the bag "should have" protected him from the cold. Based upon the given facts, please discuss the merits of his suit. Is it likely that the suit succeed, why or why not?

# 2: Now consider that Bob discussed his plans with the sleeping bag salesperson at LL Bean. He specifically told the sales associate that he needed a bag for the camping trip tp Mt Washington in January. The salesperson told him that the 40 degree bag was the best choice.   Does this change your analysis of the merits of the law suit? Why or why not?

Answer 1

This question is based on law relating to sale of goods and implied conditions as to quality and fitness.

1st Case is when buyer doesn't asks the seller for a specific purpose and directly purchases.

2nd case is where buyer specifically asked the seller for the fitness of goods for a specific purpose and purchases the goods based on judgement of the seller.