Exam 7: Business Torts and Product Liability

Compensation for injured parties accounts for ____ of the total cost of the tort system.

When the tort of interference with contractual relations occurs, the party responsible for the tort is the party who breached an existing contract.

A manufacturer is liable for injuries suffered by product users regardless of the sophistication of the buyer.

Caveat emptor means let the buyer beware.

In which of the following cases discussed in the text was the manufacturer held liable based on failure to warn:

When a person suffers an injury due to deliberate deception, there may be a tort of defamation.

The rule that "The manufacturer of a product is liable in the production and sale of a product for negligence, if the product may reasonably be expected to inflict harm on the user if the product is defective" originated from:

In MacPherson v. Buick Motor the court held for MacPherson for injuries caused by defective wheels on his Buick. This case allowed for negligence for product liability:

The rule of caveat emptor meant that if there was no privity between a producer and an injured consumer, the consumer had no case against the producer.

Glasgow was electrocuted and died when he turned on his new television set. His family sued the TV maker, claiming design defect. The family will likely:

The tort of interference with contractual relations occurs when Party C attempts to get Party A, who has a contract with Party B, to breach the contract in favor of doing business with Party C.

As stated by the California high court in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, where Greenman was injured when a tool his wife bought him malfunctioned, manufacturers should bear the costs of injuries their products cause and thus:

One element of fraud or intentional misrepresentation is scienter. That means:

The Restatement (Third) of Torts on product defect recommends that courts use a cost-benefit test to see if added safety is worthwhile.

A warranty is:

In which of the following cases discussed in the text was the manufacturer held liable based on failure to warn:

Although Japan is often cited as an example of a place with less litigation and fewer lawyers:

In Greenman v. Yuba Power Products the court imposed strict liability on a producer for failure to warn the consumer of dangers involved in using the machine.

Even if a product is safe for ordinary use, a producer may be held strictly liable in tort for not telling consumers of possible dangers associated with improperly using the product.

Under the rule of ____, the producer of a defective product that caused injury to a consumer was not liable unless there was a contractual relationship between producer and injured party.