The following excerpt is from Saxton v. Pets Warehouse, Inc., 180 Misc.2d 377, 691 N.Y.S.2d 872 (N.Y. App. Term 1999):
We note that plaintiff is not limited to the remedies provided by subdivision 1 of section 753 of the General Business Law as the animal came within the definition of "goods" as set forth in section 2-105 of the Uniform Commercial Code and defendant was a "merchant" within the meaning of section 2-104(1) of said Code (see, General Business Law 753 ). Accordingly, plaintiff could recover damages pursuant to section 2-714 of the Code on the theory that defendant breached the implied warranty of merchantability (see, Uniform Commercial Code 2-314; Sacco v. Tate, 175 Misc.2d 901, 672 N.Y.S.2d 618).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.