In the case of Pittsley v. Houser, the court:
A) held that the contract should be severed into different parts, applying the UCC to the part of the contract involving goods and the common law to the services part of the contract.
B) held that the "predominant factor" test contravened the UCC's declared purpose.
C) found the "predominant factor" test was the better, more prudent rule.
D) found the CISG governed the contract in question.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In Pittsley v. Houser, the court found the "predominant factor" test to be the better, more prudent rule for determining whether a contract is primarily for goods or services, which in turn decides if the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) applies. This test helps in distinguishing whether a contract's primary nature is for the sale of goods or the provision of services, thereby determining the applicable law.

In the Case of Pittsley V