FiltersDone

Question type

Essay

Multiple Choice

Short Answer

True False

Matching

Exam 10: Product Liability

Show Answer

Share

---

All types

Filters

Study FlashcardsPractice ExamLearn

Question 21

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

What was the result on appeal of the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco case in the text in which the trial court awarded a smoker approximately $200,000 against R. J. Reynolds Tobacco?

A) The appellate court reversed the award, finding the company had no duty to warn smokers of the harm associated with smoking cigarettes.
B) The appellate court reversed the award because harm from smoking cigarettes was unforeseeable.
C) The appellate court affirmed the award against R. J. Reynolds Tobacco, which before 1969 had negligently failed to warn smokers of the harm associated with smoking cigarettes.
D) The appellate court affirmed the award, even though the product was misused.
E) The appellate court reversed the award because consumers were harmed only when they misused the product.

F) A) and E)
G) B) and D)

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 22

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

________ is a theory of negligence that teaches that an accident that is unlikely to occur unless the defendant was negligent is itself circumstantial evidence that the defendant was negligent.

A) Strict liability
B) Res ipsa loquitur
C) Warranty of fitness
D) Comparative negligence
E) Negligence per se

F) C) and E)
G) B) and C)

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 23

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

A defendant who acts in compliance with federal laws may argue that state tort law is ________ by a federal statute designed to ensure the safety of a particular class of products.

Strict product liability focuses on the actions of the manufacturer or seller, not the product.

Define and describe the three commonly used theories of recovery in product liability cases and set forth the two common elements that a plaintiff must generally show in order to prevail under a product liability theory.

Even if a harmful product cannot be traced back to a particular manufacturer, a plaintiff may still be able to recover in a products liability action under the market share theory.

Theo is an aspiring young scientist who agrees to testify at his friend Luminar's trial. Theo has a college degree in chemistry but has not worked in the field, but has a lab in his basement where he conducts experiments. The courts would consider Luminar's testimony as:

[Scissors Injury] Yvonne bought a new pair of large-sized, extra-sharp scissors made by CutCo at her local store, BuyStuff. At the time of purchase, Yvonne noticed that the packaging was torn. The clerk offered her a discount because of the damage. When Yvonne tried to open the package containing the scissors at home, she found the hard plastic packaging was difficult to open. Her roommate, Gwen, handed her a knife to cut the packaging. While Yvonne was cutting, the hard plastic sliced her finger, causing her to drop the package. When the package fell, the scissors fell out of the package onto Yvonne's toe. Gwen then picked up the scissors and ran to call an ambulance. Unfortunately, she tripped and fell while running with the scissor blades facing up, and was stabbed in the stomach. Yvonne and Gwen each suffered injuries and sued CutCo and BuyStuff, alleging strict product liability. -Cutco believes it is not liable under the state-of-the-art defense. Is Cutco likely to be correct?

Which of the following products would likely have the lowest cost for product liability insurance?

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true regarding the consumer expectations test for product defect?

[Allergy Injuries] Drug company ABC Drugs introduced a new over-the-counter allergy pill guaranteed to prevent sneezing and sniffling for twenty-four hours after the consumption of one pill. The packaging contained warnings of the drug's side effects, including nausea and headache. After it was initially put on the market, the company became aware of a risk of dizziness from the drug in people with high blood pressure. However, the company did not warn of the additional risk because the company was concerned that individuals might not buy the pill. The risk of dizziness for the average person was extremely low. Julia had suffered allergies for years and had tried nearly every new product on the market. She even maintained a blog called "Ask the Expert About Allergies." She thought that ABC's pill was a great idea and purchased it at her local convenience store. She purchased the product after the date the company became aware of the issues involving dizziness. She took one pill and felt fine for a few days. Then, however, she began feeling dizzy. Her dizziness caused her to fall and break her leg on a flight of steps. She later discovered that the allergy pill likely made her dizzy. Julia sued under state law alleging failure to warn of the dangerous side effect of the drug. The drug company claimed that it had no duty to list dizziness as a risk because it was an over-the-counter drug and the risk of dizziness to the average person was extremely rare. -Is the company correct that it had no duty to warn of the risk of dizziness?

________ is when an individual is a party to a contract.

[Scissors Injury] Yvonne bought a new pair of large-sized, extra-sharp scissors made by CutCo at her local store, BuyStuff. At the time of purchase, Yvonne noticed that the packaging was torn. The clerk offered her a discount because of the damage. When Yvonne tried to open the package containing the scissors at home, she found the hard plastic packaging was difficult to open. Her roommate, Gwen, handed her a knife to cut the packaging. While Yvonne was cutting, the hard plastic sliced her finger, causing her to drop the package. When the package fell, the scissors fell out of the package onto Yvonne's toe. Gwen then picked up the scissors and ran to call an ambulance. Unfortunately, she tripped and fell while running with the scissor blades facing up, and was stabbed in the stomach. Yvonne and Gwen each suffered injuries and sued CutCo and BuyStuff, alleging strict product liability. -BuyStuff's attorney wants to file a motion to dismiss, claiming that BuyStuff is not the manufacturer and cannot be held liable for the injuries. Is BuyStuff's attorney correct?

Which of the following is a defense used by a defendant to demonstrate that his alleged negligent behavior was reasonable, given the available scientific knowledge existing at the time the product was sold or produced?

Under strict product liability, the actions of the manufacturer or seller are not relevant; rather, strict product liability focuses on ________.

[Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase a large squirt gun for her son, Alex, to use while playing in the pool. The squirt gun was of a very elaborate variety and had a number of different attachments for different sprays of water. The squirt gun came with instructions for assembly and use, and provided warnings against various types of misuse. The pamphlet that came with the squirt gun advised that the squirt gun should be used only under adult supervision, that it must not be used by children under 11 years old, and that nothing should be put into the squirt gun except water. Alex had a party for his tenth birthday at the pool. A number of children came. A guest, Sophie, age 10, decided to load pebbles along with water into the gun. She began shooting the gun and hit Rachel, another guest, in the eye, requiring treatment at an emergency room. Rachel required some minor surgery, but sustained no permanent injury. Rachel's parents stated that they looked at the squirt gun when they initially arrived at the party, but did not notice any warnings affixed directly to the product. Rachel's parents want to sue someone for something, but they do not particularly want to sue Marie, their friend and hostess of the party. -Which statement is true regarding any assertion by Rachel's parents that a warning should have been affixed to the product itself to warn adults as well as children?

Which of the following do courts often consider in determining whether a manufacturer was negligent in failing to warn?

The lack of a feasible way to make a safer product prevents liability based upon an alleged defective product as a matter of law.

Which of the following is true about expert witnesses?

[Lead paint] Alessia grew up in an old house. When Alessia was 25 years old, she was diagnosed with permanent kidney and nervous system damage, which doctors determined was linked to the lead paint she chipped off her windows and digested when she was a younger child. In order to offset some of the continuing medical costs, Alessia wants to sue the lead paint manufacturer, however, she doesn't know what brand of paint was used in her home. The most popular brand of lead paint in her area at the time the interior of her house was painted was made by ColorCo, but PaintCo and BrightCo were significant producers also with PaintCo having sales just behind ColorCo. -Which paint manufacturers can Alessia sue?