imposed by this Agreement.” Wadsworth states that the limitation-of-liability clause is ambiguous because it is unclear whether it applies to Fox Alarm’s alleged failure to adequately monitor the alarm signals at George’s Auto Parts on the night of the alleged burglary and fire. However, the clause states that it expressly applies to a “loss, damage, or injury due to a failure of service or equipment....” The limitation-of-liability clause unambiguously applies to Fox Alarm’s alleged failure to monitor the alarm system. This Court has held that a provision in a sales agreement limiting a seller’s liability is enforceable. Puckett, Taul & Underwood, Inc. v. Schreiber Corp., 551 So.2d 979, 983 (Ala.1989). See also Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Barnard, 799 So.2d 208, 214-15 (Ala.Civ.App.2001)(<HOLDING>). Moreover, this Court has held that “
holding that a limitationofliability provision in an airline ticket limited deltas liability for lost golf clubs to 1250 recognizing that a limited liability company has the citizenship of its membership holding no liability in negligence for plaintiffs outofpocket development costs allegedly lost as a result of defendants pollution injury to property which plaintiff had option to purchase holding that liability for depreciation would constitute consequential damages barred by sovereign immunity where government did not benefit from property that lost value during seizure period holding that a limited liability companys citizenship is that of its members