Clifford N. Herbstman, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Eastman Kodak Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division and remanded for entry of an order requiring the plaintiff to return the defective camera for repair, holding that Kodak's express repair warranty did not create implied warranties of merchantability or fitness and that no effective limitation of remedies barred the repair offer. The Court also held that the Uniform Commercial Code does not apply to the manufacturer‑purchaser relationship in this case. A concurring opinion agreed with the result but emphasized strict liability principles.