|
' the same condition as that which it was when delivered and placed into the
<br />stream Or commerce by the Defendant.
<br />IX.
<br />Pdor to November 13, 1989, Ilre Defendant was aware of the dangerous
<br />propensities of its produd, end Therefore;%rhelrijruies to the Plaintiff was efore-
<br />seeable result of the deledive marketing of Ns podud.
<br />..- X _.
<br />Thedeledive condtions whidr rerrdered Itre praduq unreasonably dart- - . .
<br />gerdus were eadr a protludnp cause of the aowmerrce made the basis of this
<br />suit end the PlafnOffs resoAing Injudes. ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
<br />S'd1UM1ITIII
<br />(BREACH DP WARR/WTY)- ~ ~ ~ ~~- .
<br />. .. Xl' ~ ~ ~ ..
<br />. ~: ~~~The DelendaM,'Ituough Ns agents, repmseMagves, empbyees, erdlor ~ - - . .. .
<br />aervante expmssy anNor Impfiedty warranted So etl~purchasers ant users, In-~:. ', - - . ..
<br />eluding the PWndg, that the product in quesgon was of a merchantable quality.
<br />and reasonaby fa for the padiallar purpose.lor.which hwas planned, designed: -.. '
<br />mantifadured,~essembled,9nstalled, repalrbd;:sarvice4~markeled, sold; and •~'.; ~.-.~ ~ .:. ~.
<br />tlefrv4red: ~lre Delehdanl e>pressly endlor Inipgedly wariarrled that Information ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
<br />applicable and necessary for the sale and proper use o1 this pradud was .
<br />famished and previded by the manuladurer'and Defendant herein, and that
<br />saltl inlormallon famished was adequate and-proper for persons using said
<br />produd urder ag conditions which reasonably could be expected. .
<br />wl~.,~:
<br />.. ~ .the Plaintig relied upon the warranties relemed to In Paragraph XI, prior , :.~,~ .. ~~ r ~.
<br />~to ~lhe events sal fodh in the preceding paragraphs.. ~~•~: .I, -..- ... ~ ~~ - .. -
<br />:X111.
<br />The Delerxianl breached its express and/or implied warranties referred
<br />la in Paragraphs XI ant XII in Thal:
<br />a The Defendant's produd,spedfiplly set forth In Paragraphs 111-V
<br />Irereln, was not not fit for the ordinary.purposes for which such goods are used,
<br />and therefore, was rrol of a merchantable quality.
<br />• ~ b~. The Defendant's product specifipliy sal forth in Paragraphs 111-V ~ ~ -. '
<br />- ~- herein, was rrot fd for the particular purpose for whlch h was designed,~manu- ..
<br />ladured, assembled, labdcaled, produced, marketed, sold, end delivered;
<br />c.' The.Inlomralion supp9ed by Ihe'DeteodeM was not adeµrale to solely ' '.
<br />use the prodrxY under reasonably foreseeable conditions, end the Defendant
<br />felled to supply inlormatlon necessary. to enable{/ersons to pmpedy end solely
<br />use sold produd; erd .. - ~ ' .. .. -
<br />... - . . ~ d, 'The Defendant felled fo lake reasonable, adequate, end eHedive"pre- • ~ ~~ ~ ~. ~~
<br />cautions to ensure the sale use of thls'produd . - . _ . _ . , -
<br />' ~ .. -.... '.~(1V. ~ .. ....
<br />• ~ The Defendant's breadresvt,warwnty.were ee6h a proximate cause o1 ..' .
<br />~cr~- ~; 'the oowrrenoe made the basis~ol this suh~end the Plaingffs iesuttbrg inJuries.• .c ~, ,~'~~. ' ..
<br />~'~ Ihbs,'the Defendant is liable fo the PlalagH for breaches of expraSS and Implied
<br />wamtnties as set Ivdh In Tex. Bus: d'.Com. Code §§2,313-2.315 (Vernon 1969). '
<br />CDUtdT~N ..
<br />~' (TEXAS DECEPTIVE TRADEPRACTICES ACT)
<br />XV.
<br />' ' ' Mom Than sixty (60) days pdo/ lathe filing of the PlainGlls' Original Peli-
<br />- = ' ~ tion, the Defendant hatl.adual knawledge.ol the Plaintiffs sperific complaints ~~ .
<br />'.
<br />- "'~' ,and damages, Accordingly, the Plairilill invokes the provisions of the Texas ::' ~:
<br />Deceptive Trade Praclices~onsumer Proledion Ad as sal lodh in Tex. Bus. &
<br />4
<br />5
<br />
|