Morris v. MacK's Used Cars
1992 Tenn. LEXIS 45, 824 S.W.2d 538, 17 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 754 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An 'as is' disclaimer of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) does not preclude a separate cause of action for unfair or deceptive trade practices under a state's consumer protection act.
Facts:
- In September 1985, Mack’s Used Cars & Parts, Inc. sold a vehicle described as a 1979 Ford pickup truck to Darrell Morris.
- The bill of sale contained a disclaimer stating, 'This unit sold as is. No warranties have been expressed or implied.'
- At the time of sale, the truck was a 'reconstructed' vehicle, meaning it had been previously wrecked or dismantled.
- Mack’s Used Cars knew the truck was reconstructed but did not disclose this material fact to Morris.
- The reconstructed status of the vehicle reduced its fair market value by 30 to 50 percent.
- Morris discovered the truck was reconstructed three years after the sale, when he received the certificate of title after making his final payment.
Procedural Posture:
- Darrell Morris sued Mack’s Used Cars & Parts, Inc. in a Tennessee trial court for various claims, including violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.
- The trial court found for the seller, holding that the 'as is' disclaimer barred all claims, and dismissed the suit.
- Morris, as appellant, appealed the dismissal of his Consumer Protection Act claim to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal, with Mack's Used Cars as the appellee.
- Morris then appealed to the Supreme Court of Tennessee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a seller's 'as is' disclaimer of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code also bar a buyer's claim for unfair or deceptive acts under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Reid, Chief Justice
No. A disclaimer of warranties permitted under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) does not defeat a separate cause of action for unfair or deceptive acts under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The court reasoned that the UCC and the TCPA are distinct and supplementary bodies of law that create separate causes of action with different components and defenses. The TCPA explicitly states that its remedies are 'cumulative and supplementary' to other laws and that its provisions cannot be waived by contract. While the TCPA allows for the modification of UCC warranties, it does not permit a seller to disclaim liability for its own deceptive practices, which would contravene the broad, remedial purpose of the Act to protect consumers.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a clear boundary between contractual warranty law under the UCC and statutory consumer protection law. It prevents sellers from using a standard 'as is' disclaimer as a shield against liability for fraudulent or deceptive conduct, such as the non-disclosure of known material defects. The ruling significantly strengthens consumer protection by affirming that the duties to refrain from deceptive practices and to act in good faith are independent of and superior to contractual warranty disclaimers. Consequently, sellers must be truthful and transparent about a product's history and condition, as an 'as is' clause will not protect them from claims of deception.
