Touchet Valley Grain Growers v. Opp & Seibold General Construction, Inc.
Washington Supreme Court
119 Wash. 2d 334, 831 P.2d 724 (1992)
Facts
In 1984, Touchet Valley Grain Growers (Touchet) (plaintiff) contracted with Opp & Seibold (defendant) for the construction of a grain-storage building. Opp & Seibold in turn contracted with Truss-T Structures (Truss-T) (defendant) to design the building and provide the materials. Truss-T was aware of Touchet’s identity and its intended purposes for the building. Truss-T provided a one-year warranty on the components that it manufactured, and its price book assured that it provided high-quality materials. In early 1985, after the building was completed, it began to show signs of failure. In spite of attempted repairs from Opp & Seibold and Truss-T, one of the walls of the storage building collapsed in October 1985. Touchet sued Opp & Seibold and Truss-T, claiming breaches of the implied warranties of fitness for a particular use and merchantability and breach of express warranties. Truss-T successfully moved for summary-judgment dismissal of the warranty claims, with the trial court holding that under Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-318, there was no privity between Truss-T, the manufacturer, and Touchet, the ultimate user. Touchet appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dore, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 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.
