Remedies available in law

The case of Milton Herring v. Home Depot, Inc. and Deere & Co arose from the sale of a 1999 Scotts Riding Mower, which includes a limited warranty is issued providing that Deere would "repair or replace, at its option, any covered part which is found to be defective in material or workmanship during the applicable warranty term," and that warranty repairs had to be performed by an authorized repairman. The case emphasized that breach of warranty is a distinct and separate remedy from revocation of acceptance.

For breach of warranties to exist, there must first be a warranty. This warranty may either be express or implied. This express or implied warranty is not necessary in actions for revocation of acceptance. There only needs to be a nonconformity, which satisfies the requirements in Section 36-2-608 of the Code. The fact that these two actions are distinct and independent is emphasized more by the difference of their relief. Since a breach of warranty is an action which seeks to affirm a contract, the buyer retains the merchandise bought.

On the contrary, revocation of acceptance seeks for the cancellation of not for affirmance of the contract. Therefore, as a consequence, the goods bought have to be returned to the seller. Therefore, contrary to the ruling of the circuit court, the inconsistency in fact exists when both revocation of acceptance and breach of warranties are granted, rather than when only one of them is granted and the other is denied. Breach of warranty is only one of the choices available to a plaintiff in a contract of sale, or even of lease and other contracts involving warranties.

This action is almost always available for plaintiffs due to the fact that almost all transactions involve warranties. However, being only one of the remedies available in law, the plaintiff is not compelled to limit his action to this one in cases when this remedy is available. There are other remedies available whose elements for a cause of action to exist are completely satisfied. The plaintiffs may choose among these remedies depending on the type of relief he is looking for.