New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Harsco Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
497 F.3d 323 (2007)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Harsco Corporation (Harsco) (defendant) contracted to build a specialized vehicle for New Jersey Transit Corporation (Transit) (plaintiff). Transit drafted the contract, which included 27 pages of detailed vehicle specifications. The contract also required Harsco to sign an express warranty covering all parts and labor required to repair any defects in the vehicle or any of its components. The warranty was good for one year. Two years after Harsco delivered the vehicle, the vehicle caught fire and was destroyed. Transit sued Harsco for breaching its express warranty. Transit also sued Harsco for breaching implied warranties. Harsco had never complied with Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-316’s provisions for disclaiming such implied warranties. The federal district court dismissed Transit’s suit as untimely on the grounds that the one-year limit on Harsco’s express warranty effectively reduced UCC § 2-725’s four-year limitations period to one year. Transit appealed to the Third Circuit. As a threshold matter, the appellate court rejected § 2-725 as the deciding element in the case.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Garth, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 829,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
