Plaintiff Williams purchased a cherry-pecan ice cream cone from the defendant’s shop. While eating the ice cream, she broke her tooth on a cherry pit that was in the ice cream. She sued defendant Braum Ice Cream Stores, Inc., for breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The trial court ruled in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.

The critical thinking questions enable you to examine carefully the key differences between the two tests, including the possible implications. The larger project of the questions is to increase your awareness of the extent to which a legal decision is dependent upon the criteria chosen to reach that decision.

1. What is the fundamental difference between the natures of the two tests discussed by the court in Case 13-2?

Clue: Reread the discussion of the two tests to formulate your answer.

2. Which of the two tests is more likely to yield ambiguous reasoning when applied?

Clue: Refer to your answer to question 1.