CASE SUMMARY $13\mathrm{.}2$: $3$L Communications LLC v$.$ Merola, $2013$ WL $4803532,$ Court of App$^3$eals of Tennessee $(2013)$

Who Is a Merchant?

$3$ L Communications $(3$L$)$ is a merchant that sells high$-$end optical telecommunications equipment. Jodi Merola is a sole proprietor doing business as $"$NY Telecom Supply" $($Miss Merola$).$ In summary, $3$L entered into an agreement with Merola to purchase five optical circuit boards. Merola shipped the circuit boards via Federal Express, with the balance of $$35,090$ due on delivery in the form of a cashier's check. The circuit boards arrived at $3$L$\text{'}$s office and were paid for as agreed, but upon further inspection of the boards, $3$L discovered that they were damaged. $3$ L immediately contacted Merola and notified her that the boards were unusable. In response, Merola provided shipping instructions and an account number to be used for returning the goods. $3$L followed the shipping instructions and, two weeks later, $3$L sent an email message to Merola regarding the refund for the boards. Merola responded that she had not received the returned boards. $3$ L then supplied Merola with tracking information from the carrier that indicated that the boards had been delivered two weeks earlier. After Merola stopped responding to $3$L inquiries, $3$L filed suit to recover its $$35,090$ payment. Among other things, Merola argued that she was not a "merchant" for purposes of the UCC because she operated as a sole proprietor out of her home.

CASE QUESTIONS

Is Merola a merchant under the UCC? Why or why not?

Either way, should someone who has minimal business experience or education be held to the standard of a merchant?