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

Which test for determining design defect is also referred to as the risk-utility test?

A) The consumer expectations test.
B) The retailer expectations test.
C) The feasible alternatives test.
D) The design defects test.
E) None of these.

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

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 22

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

As of the date of text publication, what was the status of the lawsuit Pelman v. McDonald's, the case in which the plaintiffs asserted that McDonald's engaged in a scheme of deceptive advertising that in effect created the impression that McDonald's food products were nutritionally beneficial and part of a healthy lifestyle?

A) The case was dismissed and plaintiffs are appealing.
B) The case settled.
C) The judge had refused to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims, and the case is moving forward as a class action.
D) The judge ruled that only minor plaintiffs could sue, and their case is moving forward on a class action basis.
E) The judge ruled that only plaintiffs who could prove that they had eaten a sufficient amount of food at McDonald's could sue and also that the plaintiffs could not proceed on a class action basis.

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

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 23

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Under which of the following is the breach of warranty theory of liability established?

Which of the following is true regarding defenses to negligence-based product liability actions?

Which of the following is true regarding punitive damages in product liability cases?

In German product liability cases, consumers do not have a right to recover damages for pain and suffering or for emotional distress.

Which of the following do courts focus on when a strict product liability action is involved?

What was the result in the case opener involving the lawsuit against the sperm bank for providing sperm with a genetic defect?

Under a strict product liability theory, who may be held liable to an injured party?

Which of the following are considered foreseeable plaintiffs in product liability cases?

Following the case of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company, any ______ plaintiff can sue a manufacturer for its breach of duty of care.

Under the Restatement (Third) of Torts, which of the following results in strict liability?

"Squirt Gun Mishap." Zora decided to purchase a large squirt gun for her son, Rambo, to use while playing in the pool. The squirt gun was of the 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 eleven, and that nothing should be put into the squirt gun except water. Rambo had a party for his tenth birthday at the pool. A number of children came. One of the children, Sam, who was ten years old at that time, decided to load pebbles along with water into the gun. He began shooting with the pebbles and hit Alice in the eye, requiring an emergency room visit. Alice required some minor surgery, but sustained no permanent injury. Alice's parents complained that they looked at the squirt gun when they initially arrived at the party but did not notice any warnings whatsoever affixed directly to the product. Alice's parents want to sue someone for something, but they do not particularly want to sue Rambo's mother. -Which of the following is true regarding any assertion by Alice's parents that a warning should have been affixed to the product to warn adults as well as children?

"Squirt Gun Mishap." Zora decided to purchase a large squirt gun for her son, Rambo, to use while playing in the pool. The squirt gun was of the 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 eleven, and that nothing should be put into the squirt gun except water. Rambo had a party for his tenth birthday at the pool. A number of children came. One of the children, Sam, who was ten years old at that time, decided to load pebbles along with water into the gun. He began shooting with the pebbles and hit Alice in the eye, requiring an emergency room visit. Alice required some minor surgery, but sustained no permanent injury. Alice's parents complained that they looked at the squirt gun when they initially arrived at the party but did not notice any warnings whatsoever affixed directly to the product. Alice's parents want to sue someone for something, but they do not particularly want to sue Rambo's mother. -Which of the following is true regarding a lawsuit brought by Alice's parents against the manufacturer for negligence?

When an individual product has a defect making it more dangerous than identical products, that individual product is said to have which of the following defects?

The statute of limitations is the same thing as the statute of repose.

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.

A product may be found defective if a manufacturer fails to provide adequate warnings about potential dangers associated with the product.

Which of the following arises when a consumer knows that a defect exists but still proceeds unreasonably to make use of the product, creating a situation where the consumer has voluntarily assumed the risk of injury from the defect and thus cannot recover?

For his birthday, Paul's family purchased for Paul, who tips the scales at over 250 pounds, an exercise bicycle from a popular sports retailer in his community. The first time that Paul hopped on the bike, it collapsed, throwing him to the floor and severely bruising his ankle. Paul wants to sue for his injuries. He has an expert in exercise equipment examine the bicycle. The expert tells him that the bike was properly manufactured. It was not, however, designed for individuals weighing over 250 pounds. There was a warning to that effect in the brochure that came with the bicycle, but Paul's family threw that away along with the packaging; and Paul never saw it. Is there any negligence theory under which Paul can recover? If so, what is it, and what must Paul demonstrate to win?