Answers to Essay Questions: Chapter 8
Injured parties can recover damages by suing, asserting negligence under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).
To sue for negligence, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant breached its duty of care, creating an unreasonable risk to harm and such negligence or carelessness was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury.
Strict liability is a liability ascribed to a manufacturer or seller of a defective or dangerous product regardless of any fault or negligence.
This rule made it easier for injured persons to sue and made it difficult for manufacturers to defend themselves.
In the early 20th century, an injured person sued a car manufacturer for a negligence causing to a defect in its wheel; MacPherson V Buick. The wheel was made of wooden, when its spokes crumbled the car collapsed causing the plaintiff injury. The plaintiff won the case since the manufacturer breached its duty of care, creating an unreasonable risk of harm and that such careless behavior cased the plaintiff injury.
In 1944, a waitress was injured when a bottle of Coca Cola exploded in her face. She sued the local bottling company for negligence and won. The jury was convinced that the company's negligence and the California Supreme court upheld its verdict.
The rule applies to sellers liable for defective products due to a flaw in he manufacturer, or due to a design defect failure to warn.
In each case the focus is not on the company's behavior but on whether the product itself is defective and unreasonably unsafe.
Plaintiff must prove that the product was the proximate cause of harm and that the defendant breached a duty to warn and that the failure to warn also was the cause of the plaintiff's injury.
Punitive damages, under the common law of torts, juries are free to award an injured plaintiff all sorts of damages, not only to compensate for damages or out-of-pocket medical expenses, but also for...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document