Irma Virgil bought a pint$-$sized thermos bottle from Kash N$$ Karry. After a couple of months of use, she poured coffee into it one morning and was adding some milk when it imploded, throwing hot coffee and glass into her face and injuring her eye. Irma testified that she had not dropped the thermos and had not abused it$.$ She sued Kash N$$ Karry, claiming among other things, breach of warranty of merchantability. Were any Implied Warranties breached?

$1)$ Briefly summarize the facts of the case $-$ restating the facts in a clear and concise manner $($ You must understand the facts of a case before you can attempt to resolve it$)$

$2)$ Identify the major issue$($s$)$ that flow from the facts $($Legal issue$).$ Sometimes this process indicates the various avenues of litigation open to the plaintiff. For instance the issues identified can suggest that both Negligence and Strict Liability may be pursued.

$3)$ Identify the elements of each issue $($Determine the relevant elements of each issue. For instance Negligence has: Existence of Duty of care, Breach of that Duty, Proof of Injury and Causation or Proximate Cause$).$

$4)$ Discuss the elements of each issue as they apply to the case.

$5)$ Apply the relevant law $($Make a decision based on the relevant law$).$

$6)$ Cite a supporting case $($As this is common law, briefly state the facts of the supporting case and show how it can serve as a precedent to your case problem$).$