Bowdoin v. Showell Growers, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
817 F.2d 1543 (1987)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Showell Growers, Inc. (Showell) (defendant) purchased a spray rig manufactured by FMC Corporation (FMC) (defendant). The spray rig contained parts manufactured by NEAPCO, Inc. (NEAPCO) (defendant). At least two weeks after the purchase was completed, the spray rig was delivered to Showell, along with an instruction manual. The last page of the instruction manual contained a warranty disclaimer. Rachel and Billy Bowdoin (plaintiffs) raised chickens in Alabama for Showell. Under a contract with Showell, the Bowdoins were required to clean their chicken house, and Showell provided the Bowdoins with the spray rig for this purpose. However, Mrs. Bowdoin was severely injured while using the spray rig. The Bowdoins sued the defendants, alleging breach by FMC and NEAPCO of the implied warranties of fitness and merchantability. The district court granted summary judgment for FMC and NEAPCO on these claims, finding that FMC and NEAPCO had effectively disclaimed the implied warranties with the disclaimer in the instruction manual. The Bowdoins appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wisdom, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
