## Facts

- Crysco Oilfield Services, Inc. (Crysco), an Oklahoma oil-well servicing company, purchased machinery known as “shale shakers” from Hutchinson-Hayes International, Inc. (Hutchinson-Hayes), a Texas seller.
- Shale shakers are used in the oil-well servicing business to perform their standard function in the servicing process.
- Crysco bought the shale shakers for that standard, ordinary use in its oilfield operations.
- Crysco alleged the shale shakers did not operate properly and caused losses.
- Crysco sued Hutchinson-Hayes in federal district court (diversity), asserting breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose under Oklahoma’s version of U.C.C. § 2-315 (12A Okla. Stat. § 2-315 (1981)); Crysco also asserted a claim under the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act.
- After Crysco rested its case, Hutchinson-Hayes moved for a directed verdict on the § 2-315 implied-fitness claim; the district court denied the motion.
- The jury returned a verdict for Crysco on the implied-fitness claim, and judgment was entered on that verdict.
- Hutchinson-Hayes appealed, arguing the evidence was legally insufficient to support the fitness-for-a-particular-purpose verdict and that a directed verdict should have been granted.

## Issues

1. Whether, viewing the evidence most favorably to Crysco, a reasonable jury could find the elements of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose under Oklahoma U.C.C. § 2-315 when the shale shakers were purchased for their ordinary use and the record did not show buyer reliance on the seller’s skill or judgment.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit reversed the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict for Crysco on the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
- The court held Hutchinson-Hayes was entitled to a directed verdict because the evidence showed only ordinary use of the shale shakers and did not establish a “particular purpose” within the meaning of § 2-315.
- The court also held the record did not support a finding that Crysco relied on Hutchinson-Hayes’s skill or judgment to select or furnish goods suitable for a special use.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion (effectively removing the § 2-315 claim from the case).

## Legal Principles

- Under Oklahoma’s adoption of U.C.C. § 2-315, an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose arises only if (1) the seller has reason to know the buyer’s particular purpose at the time of contracting, and (2) the seller has reason to know the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods.
- A “particular purpose” is a use that differs from the goods’ ordinary purpose; when the buyer seeks to use the goods in the customary way, complaints about performance ordinarily sound in merchantability, not § 2-315 fitness.
- Reliance is an essential element of a § 2-315 claim; without evidence that the buyer actually relied on the seller’s skill or judgment, the claim fails as a matter of law.
- A directed verdict is proper when the evidence points only one way and permits no reasonable inference supporting the nonmoving party, with evidence and inferences viewed in the light most favorable to that party (as stated in the Tenth Circuit’s directed-verdict standard, including Zimmerman).

## Conclusion

Because Crysco purchased shale shakers for their normal oilfield function and did not present legally sufficient evidence of a distinct “particular purpose” or reliance on the seller’s skill or judgment, the Tenth Circuit held the district court should have granted a directed verdict for Hutchinson-Hayes on the U.C.C. § 2-315 implied-fitness claim and reversed and remanded.


Crysco Oilfield Services, Inc. v. Hutchinson-Hayes International, Inc., 913 F.2d 850 (1990)