Food Lion Case Summary

452 Words1 Page

Processed foods are produced and consumed worldwide. They provide numerous people with a quick and satisfying means for food and drink consumption. Manufacturers produce these items in vast batches, which can lead to the occasional faulty good. However, due to the implied warranty of fitness for human consumption, consumers continue to purchase processed foods on the assumption that they are safe to consume. In the case of Marion G. Goldman v. Food Lion, Incorporated, Goldman suffered injuries and dissatisfaction as a result of her assumption that the goods were safe to consume. In addition, Goldman should receive damages for her injures because it is a food manufacturer’s duty to ensure that their products are safe.
In this case Goldman purchased a can of Food Lion brand peach halves from a Food Lion supermarket in Chesapeake, Virginia. Upon consuming the peaches, she bit down on a hard object, heard a crack, followed by pain, she spat out blood, and recovered a peach pit fragment from her mouth. Consequently, the pit fractured her lower denture which caused her pain and a …show more content…

pass without objection in the trade under the contract description; and ... are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used”. I agree with the court’s ruling, because the peach pit fragment violated the consumer’s expectation test and the ordinary purpose for which such goods are used assumption. When eating a can of peach halves, an ordinary consumer would expect that the peaches are prepared in a manner that there are only peach flesh and juice or syrup in the can. In this case the can contained an additional element that was not expected to be in a can of peach halves. Additionally, as a result of this unexpected element a consumer sustained

Open Document