Exam 7: Business Torts and Product Liability

In Parish v. ICON, where a person was severely injured when jumping on a trampoline and sued its maker and the maker of a safety net for failure to warn, the Iowa high court held that the manufacturers were not liable because:

Which of the following is not needed to establish the tort of intentional misrepresentation:

"Sports Glasses" advertises that is product will not break when used in contact sports. A hockey player catches a stick in the face; his "Sports Glasses" break and injure him. He sues the makers of "Sports Glasses." They likely be held:

The courts have held that firms in an industry could be held liable jointly for damages done by products they had produced.

In Old Island Fumigation, a company was not held liable for injuries caused by its fumigations activities because it could not have foreseen those injuries.

Products liability suits are won for what reason(s):

In MacPherson v. Buick, where the wheel on a new Buick collapsed, causing the car to crash, injuring MacPherson, the court of appeals held that:

In which of the following cases was the manufacturer held liable based on design defect:

In a case of intentional interference with contractual relations the claim is:

The Restatement (Third) of Torts on product defect eliminates the concern about inadequate warnings that was critical to the Second version.

Foreign firms that sell products in the U.S. do not have to bear the costs of compliance with strict liability standards.

If Company A runs an aggressive advertising campaign that tells customers why they should quit doing business with Company B and do business with A instead, B will be able to sue A for interference with a prospective advantage.

One who by experience and expertise is aware of the possible health hazards associated with the use of a product and who has an obligation to inform its employees and customers of potential hazards is:

The tort system in the U.S. is estimated to cost about $250 billion a year.

In Old Island Fumigation v. Barbee, a fumigation company sprayed two condominiums. Some of the fumes leaked, without Old Island's knowledge, into a third, unprotected condominium. In this case:

The term privity of contract refers to:

During the 19th century, parties injured by a defective product, who did not have a contractual relationship with the seller, were under the rule of:

In MacPherson v. Buick, where the wheel on a new Buick collapsed, causing the car to crash, injuring MacPherson, the court of appeals held MacPherson could sue:

A manufacturing defect is one which:

Courts developed strict liability in tort when strict liability under contract law proved too restrictive.