Exam 7: Business Torts and Product Liability

arrow
  • Select Tags
search iconSearch Question
flashcardsStudy Flashcards
  • Select Tags

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:

(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(80)

In Baxter v. Ford Motor, where Baxter lost an eye because the glass in his car windshield was not shatterproof as Ford had claimed, Ford's liability was based on:

(Multiple Choice)
4.8/5
(82)

Although Japan has few lawyers per person than the United States:

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(71)

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:

(Multiple Choice)
4.8/5
(75)

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:

(Multiple Choice)
4.8/5
(75)

Negligence of other parties is irrelevant to the imposition of liability in ____ cases.

(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(75)

Most tort suits are filed in:

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(78)

Which of the following activities is an example of an ultrahazardous activity:

(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(73)

In Old Island Fumigation, a company was held liable for injuries caused by its fumigations activities despite it having been provided false information by the property owner.

(True/False)
4.9/5
(69)

An affirmation of fact or promise made by a seller to a buyer that relates to the goods and becomes part of the basis of the bargain creates a(n):

(Multiple Choice)
4.8/5
(62)

The tort of fraud requires the wrongdoer to intentionally mislead another party.

(True/False)
4.7/5
(70)

Under the rule of strict liability in tort, to be successful an injured party must show that the:

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(72)

In Gieseke v. IDCA, Gieseke formed a company to compete with his old employer and worked with one of the former owners of his old employer in the new company. His former employer moved some of the equipment of the new company and changed its mailing address without permission of Gieseke or his partner. When Gieseke sued, the courts held that the former employer was not liable for improper interference as that tort is not recognized in Minnesota.

(True/False)
4.8/5
(81)

Unknown hazards products liability cases involve:

(Multiple Choice)
5.0/5
(88)

When false information is intentionally presented as fact there may be a tort of:

(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(79)

Strict liability for ultrahazardous activities is an old concept going back more than a century.

(True/False)
4.8/5
(77)

Ultrahazardous activity is activity that:

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(81)

The basis of the case in a(n) ____ case is the relationship between the manufacturer and the injured party.

(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(79)

When a company buys dangerous chemicals to use in the workplace, it is presumed to be a sophisticated buyer who should know of many of the dangers involved in using the product, so strict liability is not likely to apply to the seller in case of work injury.

(True/False)
4.9/5
(84)

An express warranty is:

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(82)
Showing 101 - 120 of 361
close modal

Filters

  • Essay(0)
  • Multiple Choice(0)
  • Short Answer(0)
  • True False(0)
  • Matching(0)