CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 1233
Implied Warranty of Merchantability for Food—Essential
Factual Elements
[Name of plaintiff] claims that [he/she/ nonbinary pronoun] was harmed by
the [food product] that was sold by [name of defendant] because the [food
product] was not fit for human consumption. To establish this claim,
[name of plaintiff] must prove all of the following:
1. That [name of plaintiff] [ate/drank] a [food product] sold by [name
of defendant];
2. That, at the time of purchase, [name of defendant] was in the
business of selling the [food product] [or by [his/her/ nonbinary
pronoun] occupation held [himself/herself/ nonbinary pronoun /itself]
out as having special knowledge or skill regarding this [food
product]];
3. That the [food product] was harmful when consumed;
4. That the harmful condition would not reasonably be expected by
the average consumer;
5. That [name of plaintiff] was harmed; and
6. That the [food product] was a substantial factor in causing [name
of plaintiff]’s harm.
New September 2003
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2025
- Content hash
a4d4613f51adaaf6f026f18a5bb0757190bba348029c316542eb55883d6f4f69
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.