Hill v. BASF Wyandotte Corp.
South Carolina Supreme Court
311 S.E.2d 734 (1984)
Facts
A farmer named Hill (plaintiff) bought cans of an herbicide called Basalin from a retail distributor to use on some of his crops. BASF Wyandotte Corporation (BWC) (defendant) manufactured the Basalin. Each can of Basalin indicated that it was reasonably fit for the purpose referred to in the product’s directions. Additionally, each can of Basalin contained a limitation stating that BWC would not be liable for consequential damages under any circumstances. Hill sued BWC for breach of warranty and alleged that the crops he treated with Basalin performed far worse than the crops he treated with a different herbicide. A jury ruled in Hill’s favor and awarded him a large sum of money. On appeal, the circuit court found that the jury improperly awarded consequential damages under Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-715 to Hill despite a valid limitation against the same. Thus, the circuit court reversed and remanded the case to the district court for retrial. Thereafter, the district court sought guidance from the higher court through a certified question as to the proper measure of actual damages for herbicide failure under the UCC if there is a valid limitation on consequential damages.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Littlejohn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
