In Klein v. Asgrow Seed Co. (1966) 246 Cal. App. 2d 87, cans sold to a seed broker were labeled and warranted as containing seed of a fast-ripening tomato variety, although the manufacturer knew that the seed was, in fact, mixed with "rogues." (Klein, supra, 246 Cal. App. 2d at p. 91.) However, the fine print on the warranty limited the manufacturer's liability to the purchase price of the seed (id. at p. 92), and the manufacturer argued that there was an express agreement and course of dealing that limited its liability to the price of the seed. (Id. at pp. 98-99.) The Court nonetheless concluded that there was no agreement or course of dealing that limited the seed manufacturer's liability to a refund of the purchase price where the mixed seed was knowingly and deliberately sold as pedigreed seed. (Id. at p. 99.) The Court also ruled that had there been such an agreement--based on the fine print on the cans limiting liability to the purchase price--it would have been void under section 1668 (id. at p. 100) and concluded: "Civil Code section 1668 makes the statement of limitation of liability void as against public policy." (Id. at p. 101.)