Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42a-2-314

(2) Goods to be merchantable must be at least such as (a) pass without objection in the trade under the contract description; and (b) in the case of fungible goods, are of fair average quality within the description; and (c) are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; and (d) run, within the variations permitted by the agreement, of even kind, quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved; and (e) are adequately contained, packaged, and labeled as the agreement may require; and (f) conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label if any.

(3) Unless excluded or modified as provided by section 42a-2-316 other implied warranties may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.

Cited. 176 C. 245; 181 C. 62; 182 C. 561; 184 C. 10; Id., 607; 191 C. 150; 203 C. 342; 216 C. 65.

Cited. 1 CA 690; 2 CA 308; 27 CA 688; Id., 810; 33 CA 575. Clear purpose of implied warranty of merchantability is not to assign blame, but to assign risk and that fault is not an element of plaintiff's case for breach of that warranty where defendant unknowingly sold plaintiff a vehicle with a salvage history. 87 CA 687.

Where defendant restaurateur, sued by plaintiff customer who consumed defective clams, impleaded third party defendant as supplier, statute of limitations barred third party action and demurrer to third party complaint was sustained. 28 CS 385. To establish breach of implied warranty or merchantability under section, it must be proven that the “goods” were not merchantable at time of sale. 33 CS 108. Cited. 37 CS 735; 42 CS 153.

Cited. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 344, 345. When salesman for defendant car dealer several times informed plaintiff car was sold “as is” and “no guarantee” was stamped on sales contract and receipt given plaintiff, there was no implied warranty of fitness in sale of the car. Id., 685. Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 482.