Rampey v. Novartis Consumer Health, Inc.

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court reviewed a summary judgment entered for Novartis in a putative class action concerning Ex-Lax containing phenolphthalein. The court held that, because Rampey purchased the product from a retailer and sought only economic damages, he lacked the contractual privity required to pursue implied-warranty claims against the manufacturer. The court also addressed the alleged sufficiency of notice under Alabama's Uniform Commercial Code and the denial of leave to amend the complaint.

Holdings

1. Under Alabama's Uniform Commercial Code, a consumer cannot maintain an action against a manufacturer for breach of the implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose when the manufacturer was not the seller in the transaction and the claimed injury is purely economic.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying leave to amend a complaint after summary judgment had been entered in favor of the defendant to add a new unjust-enrichment claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a consumer who purchased an over-the-counter drug from a retailer may sue the drug's manufacturer for breach of implied warranties when the consumer seeks only economic damages and lacks contractual privity with the manufacturer.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion filed after summary judgment to vacate the judgment and amend the complaint to add an unjust-enrichment claim.
3. Whether the filing of the lawsuit constituted sufficient notice of breach under Ala. Code 1975, § 7-2-607.

Disposition

affirmed