Slater v. Burnham Corp.

1. The direct and redirect testimony of the plaintiff (the truth of which is not for us to determine) to the effect that he had purchased the defective low-water cutoff directly from the defendant rather than from its agent or distributor was sufficient to warrant a finding of the privity of contract between the parties which was required prior to the amendment of G. L. c. 106, § 2-318, which was effected by St. 1971, c. 670, g 1. See and contrast Haley v. Allied Chem. Corp. 353 Mass. 325, 331 (1967); Necktas v. General Motors Corp. 357 Mass. 546, 549 (1970). 2. The evidence was sufficient to…