Conn. Civ. Jury Instr. 5.3-2

The plaintiff alleges the defendant breached an implied warranty of merchantability in that the

<identify the good> was not of merchantable quality. Any agreement for the sale of goods

contains an implied warranty that the goods sold are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such

goods are used. This warranty is not an explicit part of a contract, that is, it is not a written part

of the contract between the parties. Rather, it is a duty imposed by law and thus is implied even

if there is no written agreement for such a warranty. To be merchantable, <identify the good>

must meet [all] the following standard(s): <Only one or more standards may be at issue. Insert

as appropriate:>

• it must pass without objection in the trade under the description in the contract;

• a fungible

1 good must be of fair average quality within the description;

• it must be fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used;

• it must be, within the variations permitted by the agreement, of even kind,

quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved;

• it must be adequately contained, packaged, and labeled as the agreement

requires;

• it must conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the

(container/label).

If the plaintiff has proven that the <identify the good> was not merchantable, then the plaintiff

has proven the claim of a violation of the implied warranty of merchantability; and further, if the

plaintiff proves harm or damage as a result that was proximately caused by a breach of this

warranty, then you must find for the plaintiff on this claim.