Bob has plans to camp overnight near Mt. Washington, the highest peak in the northeast, in January. Temperatures in that part of the White Mountains, routinely are well below zero, without wind chill. The winds can be severe and often exceed 100 mph. Recently, Mt Washington recorded the highest wind chill ever in the USA: 108 below zero! Bob knows he will need a sleeping bag but has limited funds to purchase a sleeping bag.

In August he travels to LL Bean, Freeport, Maine to purchase a sleeping bag. Bob makes his way to the bag section and without consulting with store employees, selects a bag, primarily because of the bright color and low price. The bag is rated as "warm" down to 40 degrees above zero (F). He pays for the bag, without discussing the purchase with the cashier, or why or when he plans to use the bag.

He goes to Mt. Washington, in January, camps out and the temperature drops to 20 below (F), with wind chill -45 F. It is the first time he has used the bag and he suffers severe frostbite on his toes, necessitating the amputation of five toes.

Bob would like to sue LL Bean for the loss of his toes. His theory is that the bag "should have" protected him from the cold. Based upon the given facts, please discuss the merits of his suit. Is it likely that the suit succeeds, why or why not?

Be sure to cite the proper section of the UCC that supports your answer. Hint: Review the sections in UCC 2-301, et al.

# 2: Now consider that Bob discussed his plans with the sleeping bag salesperson at LL Bean. He specifically told the sales associate that he needed a bag for the camping trip to Mt Washington in January. The salesperson told him that the 40-degree bag was the best choice. Does this change your analysis of the merits of the lawsuit? Why or why not?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In the first scenario Bobs chances of succeeding in a lawsuit against LL Bean for the loss of his toes due to frostbite from the sleeping bag seem unlikely to succeed This is because of the doctrine o... View the full answer