Question 1

What is the term used by courts for testimony by researchers that includes biased data, spurious inferences, data dredging, and sometimes fraud?

Accepted Answer

A)   Biased science.
B)   Circumstantial evidence.
C)   Dredging.
D)   Junk science.
E)   Expert testimony.F) B) and D)
G) None of the above

Question 2

An implied warranty is a warranty that is clearly stated by the seller or manufacturer.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 3

When the user of a cosmetic or over-the-counter drug has an adverse reaction to that product, ordinary consumers (i.e., not sophisticated users) have sometimes brought a negligent failure-to-warn action. Describe at least one approach or test used by courts in determining whether a plaintiff can prove negligence in these types of cases.

Accepted Answer

Many courts find that there is no duty t...

Question 4

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

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 5

[Disappointing Boat Purchase] Ava went to purchase a new boat. She wanted a boat she could use in a nearby lake and also take to the coast for use in ocean waters. Ava saw a boat she liked in the showroom. She showed the boat to Brock, the sales representative at the dealership, and stated that she wanted a boat for both lake usage and ocean usage. Brock told her that the dealership had the best boats in the state, that the engine was great in the boat she liked, and that she would have no problem with steering or with the carburetor. He said nothing about whether or not the boat was an appropriate vessel for ocean waters. Ava purchased the boat. She immediately began to have significant problems with it. The engine did not perform adequately, and there were problems with the steering and carburetor. Additionally, Ava attempted to take the boat onto ocean waters and had significant difficulty. She later discovered that it was not an ocean-going vessel. It was only appropriate for lake usage.
-Under the market share theory, which of the following is not true?

Accepted Answer

A)   All defendants are tortfeasors.
B)   The allegedly harmful products are identical and share the same defective qualities.
C)   The plaintiff is unable to identify which defendant caused her injury through no fault of her own.
D)   The manufacturers were using the exact same patented design product information.
E)   The manufacturers of substantially all the defective products in the relevant area and during the relevant time are named as defendants.F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Question 6

[Allergy Injuries] Drug company ABC Drugs introduced a new over-the-counter allergy pill guaranteed to prevent sneezing and sniffling for twenty-four hours after the consumption of one pill. The packaging contained warnings of the drug's side effects, including nausea and headache. After it was initially put on the market, the company became aware of a risk of dizziness from the drug in people with high blood pressure. However, the company did not warn of the additional risk because the company was concerned that individuals might not buy the pill. The risk of dizziness for the average person was extremely low. Julia had suffered allergies for years and had tried nearly every new product on the market. She even maintained a blog called "Ask the Expert About Allergies." She thought that ABC's pill was a great idea and purchased it at her local convenience store. She purchased the product after the date the company became aware of the issues involving dizziness. She took one pill and felt fine for a few days. Then, however, she began feeling dizzy. Her dizziness caused her to fall and break her leg on a flight of steps. She later discovered that the allergy pill likely made her dizzy. Julia sued under state law alleging failure to warn of the dangerous side effect of the drug. The drug company claimed that it had no duty to list dizziness as a risk because it was an over-the-counter drug and the risk of dizziness to the average person was extremely rare.
-With regard to Julia's blog, what defense could the company claim?

Accepted Answer

A)   Misuse.
B)   Sophisticated-user.
C)   Assumption of the risk.
D)   State-of-the-art.
E)   Statute of limitations.F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Question 7

[Disappointing Boat Purchase] Ava went to purchase a new boat. She wanted a boat she could use in a nearby lake and also take to the coast for use in ocean waters. Ava saw a boat she liked in the showroom. She showed the boat to Brock, the sales representative at the dealership, and stated that she wanted a boat for both lake usage and ocean usage. Brock told her that the dealership had the best boats in the state, that the engine was great in the boat she liked, and that she would have no problem with steering or with the carburetor. He said nothing about whether or not the boat was an appropriate vessel for ocean waters. Ava purchased the boat. She immediately began to have significant problems with it. The engine did not perform adequately, and there were problems with the steering and carburetor. Additionally, Ava attempted to take the boat onto ocean waters and had significant difficulty. She later discovered that it was not an ocean-going vessel. It was only appropriate for lake usage.
-Without taking into account any statements made by either the salesperson or Ava regarding uses for the boat, what type of warranty did the seller make by merely selling the boat?

Accepted Answer

A)   The sale itself constituted an implied warranty of merchantability but not an express warranty or a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
B)   The sale itself constituted a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose but not an express warranty or an implied warranty of merchantability.
C)   The sale itself constituted an express warranty but not an implied warranty of merchantability or a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
D)   The sale itself constituted both an express warranty and a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose but not an implied warranty of merchantability.
E)   The sale itself constituted both an express warranty and an implied warranty of merchantability but not an express warranty.F) A) and E)
G) All of the above

Question 8

How can a plaintiff prove that a defect exists in a product?

Accepted Answer

A)   Through the introduction of expert testimony only.
B)   Through the introduction of expert testimony and/or circumstantial evidence.
C)   Through the introduction of circumstantial evidence.
D)   Through the introduction of expert testimony, which is always required, and sometimes circumstantial evidence.
E)   Through evidence other than expert testimony, which is never reliable because experts are paid.F) C) and D)
G) None of the above B

Question 9

Which of the following codes highlights a breach of warranty theory of liability?

Accepted Answer

A)   The Federal Commercial Code.
B)   The Federal Contract Code.
C)   The State's Rights Commercial Code.
D)   The Uniform Commercial Code.
E)   The Warranty Liability Commercial Code.F) B) and D)
G) A) and E)

Question 10

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Accepted Answer

A)   That if the plaintiff, applying the knowledge of an ordinary consumer, sees a danger and can appreciate that danger, then he cannot recover for any injury resulting from that appreciated danger.
B)   That a plaintiff must show that a retailer failed to do a proper risk-utility analysis before the plaintiff can recover against the retailer.
C)   That a plaintiff must show that a manufacturer failed to do a proper risk-utility analysis before the plaintiff can recover against the manufacturer.
D)   That a product is unreasonably dangerous if a reasonable person would conclude that the danger-in-fact, whether foreseeable or not, outweighs the utility of product.
E)   That a reasonable person must conclude that the use-in-fact of a product outweighs the risk-utility of the product.F) A) and B)
G) C) and E)

Question 11

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 12

What was the result in the text's case involving a plaintiff who suffered permanent liver damage as a result of drinking a glass of wine with a Tylenol capsule?

Accepted Answer

A)   For plaintiff, because no comparative negligence was found.
B)   For plaintiff, because the degree of potential harm was substantial and it would have been easy to place a warning on the product label.
C)   For defendant, because it had no duty to warn.
D)   For defendant, because there was no proof of market share.
E)   For defendant, because the plaintiff's adverse reaction from the ingestion of only one capsule was extremely rare.F) D) and E)
G) A) and D)

Question 13

Under strict product liability theory, which of the following would the courts consider a reasonably foreseeable party who may recover if an injury is sustained?

Accepted Answer

A)   The buyer of the product only.
B)   The buyer of the product and the buyer's family only.
C)   The buyer of the product and any of the buyer's family and the buyer's guests only.
D)   The buyer, the buyer's family, the buyer's guests, and foreseeable bystanders.
E)   The court would have to rely on expert testimony before they could determine if a person is a reasonably foreseeable party.F) B) and D)
G) A) and B)

Question 14

Which of the following is true regarding proof of design defect?

Accepted Answer

A)   States are not in agreement concerning what proof is required to establish a design defect.
B)   State law across the country is generally uniform concerning what proof is required to establish a design defect.
C)   State law is irrelevant because federal law dictates what proof is required to establish a design defect.
D)   Each local county in each state determines what proof is required to establish a design defect.
E)   Because of the amount of international trade, there are international treaties establishing for each U.S. state concerning what proof is required to establish a design defect.F) A) and D)
G) A) and C) A

Question 15

A statute violation that causes the harm that the statute was enacted to prevent constitutes ________.

Accepted Answer

A)   Strict negligence
B)   Strict scrutiny
C)   Assumption of the risk
D)   Comparative negligence
E)   Negligence per seF) A) and B)
G) B) and E)

Question 16

A certain toy designed and manufactured by a toy manufacturer is found to have a design that is defective and dangerous. These toys have which of the following types of defect?

Accepted Answer

A)   Manufacturing.
B)   Dangerous.
C)   Purposeful.
D)   Exclusionary.
E)   Design.F) B) and C)
G) A) and E) E

Question 17

Who could be considered foreseeable plaintiffs in product liability cases?

Accepted Answer

A)   Users and consumers only.
B)   Users and bystanders only.
C)   Users, consumers, and bystanders.
D)   Users only.
E)   The purchaser and any family member only.F) All of the above
G) A) and B)

Question 18

Which theory might allow a plaintiff to recover when a plaintiff cannot trace an injury caused by a defective product to any particular manufacturer?

Accepted Answer

A)   The unknown maker theory.
B)   The marginal theory.
C)   The reciprocal theory.
D)   The market share theory.
E)   The shared production theory.F) All of the above
G) C) and E)

Question 19

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Accepted Answer

A)   Breach of warranty.
B)   Negligence.
C)   Strict liability in tort.
D)   Failure to warn.
E)   Failure to warn and breach of warranty.F) C) and D)
G) A) and E)

Question 20

A plaintiff or plaintiffs may be able to recover what type(s)  of damages in negligence-based product liability cases?

Accepted Answer

A)   Compensatory damages only.
B)   Punitive damages only.
C)   Compensatory damages and punitive damages.
D)   Loss of use damages.
E)   Compensatory damages or punitive damages may be recovered, only a court can decide.F) A) and E)
G) C) and E)

Exam 10: Product Liability

What is the term used by courts for testimony by researchers that includes biased data, spurious inferences, data dredging, and sometimes fraud?

Correct Answer
verified

An implied warranty is a warranty that is clearly stated by the seller or manufacturer.

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
Many courts find that there is no duty t...
View Answer

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

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

How can a plaintiff prove that a defect exists in a product?

Correct Answer
verified
B

Which of the following codes highlights a breach of warranty theory of liability?

Correct Answer
verified

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Correct Answer
verified

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Correct Answer
verified

What was the result in the text's case involving a plaintiff who suffered permanent liver damage as a result of drinking a glass of wine with a Tylenol capsule?

Correct Answer
verified

Under strict product liability theory, which of the following would the courts consider a reasonably foreseeable party who may recover if an injury is sustained?

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following is true regarding proof of design defect?

Correct Answer
verified
A

A statute violation that causes the harm that the statute was enacted to prevent constitutes ________.

Correct Answer
verified

A certain toy designed and manufactured by a toy manufacturer is found to have a design that is defective and dangerous. These toys have which of the following types of defect?

Correct Answer
verified
E

Who could be considered foreseeable plaintiffs in product liability cases?

Correct Answer
verified

Which theory might allow a plaintiff to recover when a plaintiff cannot trace an injury caused by a defective product to any particular manufacturer?

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Correct Answer
verified

A plaintiff or plaintiffs may be able to recover what type(s) of damages in negligence-based product liability cases?

Correct Answer
verified

Exam 10: Product Liability

What is the term used by courts for testimony by researchers that includes biased data, spurious inferences, data dredging, and sometimes fraud?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

An implied warranty is a warranty that is clearly stated by the seller or manufacturer.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedMany courts find that there is no duty t...View AnswerShow Answer

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

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

How can a plaintiff prove that a defect exists in a product?

Correct AnswerverifiedB

Which of the following codes highlights a breach of warranty theory of liability?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

What was the result in the text's case involving a plaintiff who suffered permanent liver damage as a result of drinking a glass of wine with a Tylenol capsule?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Under strict product liability theory, which of the following would the courts consider a reasonably foreseeable party who may recover if an injury is sustained?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following is true regarding proof of design defect?

Correct AnswerverifiedA

A statute violation that causes the harm that the statute was enacted to prevent constitutes ________.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

A certain toy designed and manufactured by a toy manufacturer is found to have a design that is defective and dangerous. These toys have which of the following types of defect?

Correct AnswerverifiedE

Who could be considered foreseeable plaintiffs in product liability cases?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which theory might allow a plaintiff to recover when a plaintiff cannot trace an injury caused by a defective product to any particular manufacturer?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

A plaintiff or plaintiffs may be able to recover what type(s) of damages in negligence-based product liability cases?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
Many courts find that there is no duty t...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
B

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
A

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
E

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified