Exam 6: Strict Liability and Product Liability

Barry buys a new sports car.The car sits low to the ground and because of the styling,visibility,to the rear is limited.About a month after Barry has the car he backs over his pet poodle as he is leaving for work.In his strict liability suit against the car manufacturer,Barry will:

A homeowner not in the business of selling products could be sued for the sale of a defective product at a garage sale.

Manufacturers of over-the-counter drugs such as aspirin must warn consumers of possible side effects of the drug or they can be sued for selling a defective product.

Based on the law of products liability,which of the following is correct?

Which of the following best describes the defense of correction of a defect?

A public policy reason for imposing strict product liability on all in the chain of distribution is which of the following?

Carl wants to recover in a products liability lawsuit because of a couch that he bought.He must prove the following except:

Decisions in product liability cases sometimes make headlines,with much of the public outraged over what seems to be an excessive recovery for action seen to be the fault of the plaintiff.Is it too easy to recover in product liability? Why has the law changed over the past several decades to eliminate the need to prove negligence? Who wins and who loses as a result of these changes? What changes would you make if you could?

Drug manufacturers have a duty to place their products in containers that cannot be opened by children.

Which of the following is not a defect in manufacture?

Paul purchased a deluxe motor home from Wide Open Spaces Motor Homes.In a products liability suit against Wide Open Spaces Motor Homes Corporation,Paul must show which of the following in order to recover?

Negligence is a possible theory under which to recover for injuries caused by products.

Who can recover for their injuries under product liability law?

As Betty is riding her new "LogLeaper XRTSHX 10,000 GTI" mountain bike,the front axle breaks and she is injured.She decides to sue Generalized,the maker of the bike,after learning that all LogLeapers have this problem.She would most likely sue on the basis of:

A toy for a child under 3 years of age that contains parts small enough for the child to swallow is defective in terms of product liability law.

The defendant generally bears the burden of proving his or her negligence.

The injured party must prove who caused the product to become defective.

JKL,Inc.manufactures small appliances,including toasters.JKL learns that its toasters are defective and might cause serious harm to a user.Which of the following statements is not true?

The failure of the manufacturer of a product to warn users of the dangerous propensities of a product can be negligence.

Barbara purchases a Radartel cellular phone.One of the reasons she bought this was for security because she lives alone and often travels alone.After using the phone for about a week,she noticed that the rechargeable batteries (supplied in the phone by the maker)lasted a shorter time than claimed by the manufacturer.One evening a few days later,Barbara was in bed,but not yet asleep,and heard someone in her living room.She picked up the cellular phone from beside her bed and attempted to make an emergency call to 911,but the batteries were dead.She panicked and stayed in her bed motionless.About 5 minutes later,the burglar came into her bedroom,at which point she screamed.As he then tried to climb out the bedroom window she hit him with a lamp,but he kicked it back at her and injured her.The burglar got away and was never caught.Barbara sues Radartel,the maker of the phone.Prior to the lawsuit she returned the phone to the store where she bought it and learned that the batteries were defective,at which point she was provided with new batteries which have worked properly since then.Discuss the likely basis for Barbara's suit,the defenses that Radartel might raise,and the likely outcome.