Tort Law


Fairfax Injury Lawyer Brien Roche Addresses Warranties-Express

Brien Roche

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Warranties-Express  


See Va. Code § 8.2-313 indicating express warranties may be created by affirmation, description or, sample which is part of basis of bargain.


2011 Royal Indemnity Company v. Tyco Fire Products, 281 Va. 157, 704 S.E.2d 91.

Manufacturer’s description of how sprinkler head functions does not constitute express warranty of future performance.

2006 Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc., 271 Va. 117, 624 S.E.2d 1.

In this products liability case, the plaintiff properly pleaded breach of express warranty. In this case, the plaintiff alleged the existence of an express warranty and pleaded a breach of that warranty because of the failure of the product to register accurately the amount of fuel being dispensed which, was a breach of that warranty. That was sufficient to withstand a demurrer.

2003 Pulte Home Corp. v. Parex, Inc., 265 Va. 518, 579 S.E.2d 188.

Pulte and Parex were sued by homeowner in regards to stucco exterior. Pulte cross-claimed against Parex alleging breach of express warranty. Prior to hearing on Parex’s demurrer to that claim, Parex had asked for the written contract or warranty sued upon. Pulte indicated that it did not have such. In the motion for judgment, Pulte simply set forth conclusory allegations as to breach of warranty and did not set forth the essential facts of the breach of warranty and did not produce the written warranty. The demurrer was therefore properly sustained.

1999 Bayliner Marine Corp. v. Crow, 257 Va. 121, 509 S.E.2d 499.

Plaintiff purchased new boat for deep sea fishing and believed that boat could achieve certain speed levels for purposes of offshore fishing. One document that plaintiff received was statement of “Prop Matrixes” that he believed created express warranty as to maximum speed of boat as being 30 miles per hour. These matrixes did not relate to particular boat purchased by plaintiff but referred to boat with different size propellers that carried equipment weighing substantially less than what was on plaintiffs’ boat, as such, no express warranty in this instance. Plaintiff further alleged that defendant represented that boat delivered kind of performance you need to get to prime offshore fishing grounds which in this locality were 90 miles offshore. That is in fact commendation of boat’s performance and does not describe specific characteristic or feature of this boat. As such, no express warranty based upon that statement.

1999 Yates v. Pitman Mfg., Inc., 257 Va. 601, 514 S.E.2d 605.

Plaintiff in this case was not purchaser of product. Issue was whether notice of breach of warranty to products manufacturer must be given as prerequisite to recover for breach of warranty. Plaintiff was injured when outrigger on crane unit crushed his left foot. Va. Code § 8.2-607(3) provides where tender has been accepted, buyer must, within reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach, notify seller of breach or claim is barred. Plaintiff in this case was not buyer and as such, notice requirement does not preclude Yates from maintaining breach of warranty action. In regards to express warranty claim, plaintiff claimed that it had been certified at time of sale that crane unit met applicable design and construction standards of particular ANSI standard. Plaintiff presented evidence that standard was not complied with. This properly set forth claim under express warranty statute found in Va. Code § 8.2-313. Plaintiff need not show that he relied upon affirmation in order to recover under express warranty theory.

1992 Daughtrey v. Ashe, 243 Va. 73, 413 S.E.2d 336.

Description of goods became express warranty regardless of whether there was reliance on description by buyer.

1987 Collier v. Rice, 233 Va. 522, 356 S.E.2d 845.

Unconditional warranty is not insurance against all contingencies.

1981 Lansing Supply Co. v. Royal Alum., 221 Va. 1139, 277 S.E.2d 228.

Royal purchased windows from Lansing that were represented as “Draft Free.” No implied warranty pled and trial court improperly injected this issue into case.

1980 Boykins Corp. v. Weldon, Inc., 221 Va. 81, 266 S.E.2d 887.

Written contract was found not to contain any express warranty.

1975 Kay Adv. Co. v. Olde London Transp. Co., 216 Va. 273, 217 S.E.2d 876.

Seller promised to deliver buses with fully reconditioned engines. Buyer alleged breach of warranty.

1967 Marshall v. Murray Oldsmobile Co., 207 Va. 972, 154 S.E.2d 140.

Express warranty properly disclaimed existence of implied warranty.

1964 Daniels v. Truck & Equip. Corp., 205 Va. 579, 139 S.E.2d 31.

Express warranty stated sole remedy, therefore plaintiff could not claim consequential damages.

1963 Bolling v. GMAC, 204 Va. 4, 129 S.E.2d 54.

Distinction noted between breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty.

1953 McNeir v. Greer-Hale Chinchilla Ranch, 194 Va. 623, 74 S.E.2d 165.

Representations by seller as to breeding qualities of animals sold, constituted warranty of quality if, when seller made them, he intended that they would be relied on, if they were in fact relied on to induce purchase.

1961 General Bronze Corp. v. Kostopulos, 203 Va. 66, 122 S.E.2d 548.

Representations that door would not leak may have constituted express warranty.

1945 Greenland Corp. v. Allied, 184 Va. 588, 35 S.E.2d 801.

If any express warranty is inconsistent with applicable implied warranty, then implied warranty not applicable. Earlier cases distinguished. If warranties are not inconsistent, they may all apply.

For more information on express warranties see the pages on Wikipedia.

Contact Us For A Free Consultation


Contact Us For A Free Consultation

    Contact Us For A Free Consultation