Rinaldi v. Iomega Corporation

Delaware Superior Court

41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d 1143 (1999)

Relevant factsFree

Six buyers of Iomega Corporation's (defendant) zip drives, including Rinaldi (plaintiff), brought a class action claiming the drives were defective and that Iomega breached the implied warranty of merchantability. Iomega had placed a disclaimer of that warranty inside each drive's packaging, and the plaintiffs argued the disclaimer was not conspicuous under UCC 2-316(2) because buyers couldn't see it until after purchasing and opening the box. Iomega moved to dismiss based on the disclaimer.

IssueFree

Whether a warranty disclaimer is inconspicuous, as a matter of law, simply because it is located inside a product's packaging rather than visible before purchase.

Holding & reasoning

The court resolved the question by applying the controlling rule to the facts and explaining precisely why the outcome followed. Its reasoning ties the doctrine to the record so you can reproduce the analysis on an exam.

Procedural history, concurrence & dissent

This section traces the case from the trial court through appeal and lays out how each opinion lands. Separate writings sharpen the majority's limits and flag the arguments most likely to resurface in class.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Start free Log in