This case was contested between Transamerica Oil Corporation who sought action against Lynes, Inc. and their parent group, Baker International Corporation. This action was brought to recover funds after a potential breach of the express warranty statute written in the Kansas Uniform Commercial Code. Transamerica Oil Corporation inquired to Lynes, Inc. regarding an advertisement of injection packers that worked permanently. After using the product, Transamerica found they did not work permanently as advertised by Lynes. After the U.S. District Court of Kansas awarded in favor of the plaintiff, the defendants asked for an appeal.
The plaintiff, Transamerica Oil Corp., is an oil drilling and well company based out…show more content… Does the statute of limitations from Kansas laws (3 years) or UCC (4 years) apply?
2. Do the guidelines of express warranty apply in this case?
3. Were the advertisements and oral agreements of “permanently” applicable before the wording in the invoice that limited previous express or implied warranties?
4. Should the jury have seen the invoice that was signed by Transamerica to fairly assess the purchaser new the updated terms of the contract?
Defendants put forth that the plaintiff’s claims are not allowed by the statute of limitations. Baker was then allowed to show evidence that the plaintiff agreed to a limitation of liability. The Court found that the jury was properly instructed on the issue of express warranty liability. The trial court ruled that monetary fines were to be awarded to Transamerica without Baker being able to present evidence of the limit of liability instructions presented to the jury. The jury was allowed to view the invoice in question that disproved he did not know the writing on the invoices. The appeals court found that the trial court did not give proper instruction to the jury on damages. The 10th Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals ruled reversed and remanded on future proceedings regarding only the