Question 1

City Car Company and Dave's Autos enter into a contract for a sale of motor vehicles.City assures Dave's that it has valid title to the vehicles.Under the UCC,a warranty of title arises

Accepted Answer

Under the UCC, a warranty of title arises automatically in most sales contracts. Therefore, City Car Company's assurance to Dave's Autos that it has valid title to the vehicles creates an implied warranty of title.

Question 2

A manufacturer's liability to an injured party on a strict product liability theory is limited to a refund or a replacement of the defective product.

Accepted Answer

A manufacturer's liability on a strict product liability theory includes compensation for injury or damage caused by the defective product, not just a refund or replacement.

Question 3

Merchant Supply Company and National Discount Stores enter into a contract for a lease of cash registers.Merchant assures National that it has valid title to the goods.Under the UCC,a warranty of title arises

Accepted Answer

The answer of Merchant Supply Company and National Discount Stores...

Question 4

To succeed in a strict product liability suit,an injured plaintiff must show that a product's defect was the proximate cause of the injury.

Accepted Answer

In order for an injured plaintiff to succeed in a strict product liability suit, they must prove that the product's defect was the proximate cause of their injury. This means that the defect directly caused their injury and that the injury would not have occurred if the product had not been defective.

Question 5

Parker,a salesperson for Quality Textiles,Inc.,shows Rosa,a fabric buyer for Style Clothing Company,samples of cloth,stating that any shipment will match the samples.This statement is

Accepted Answer

This is an express warranty, as Parker is explicitly stating that the shipment will match the samples.

Question 6

Any product may be made entirely safe for all consumption.

Accepted Answer

It is impossible to guarantee that a product is entirely safe for all consumption, as people may have different sensitivities, allergies or vulnerabilities that can cause adverse reactions. Furthermore, some products may have unintended side effects or interactions with other substances. While efforts can be made to minimize risks and ensure product safety, there is always some level of uncertainty and potential for harm.

Question 7

Big Screen Video Corporation sells high-definition television sets.Under most circumstances,Big Screen Video will be presumed to have warranted that its title to the TVs is

Accepted Answer

The question uses the term "presumed" which means that in the absence of any explicit terms or conditions in the contract, certain warranties are automatically assumed. One such warranty is the warranty of title, which means that the seller warrants that they have good and valid title to the goods they are selling. Therefore, Big Screen Video will be presumed to have warranted that its title to the TVs is good and valid, unless there are explicit terms in the contract that state otherwise.

Question 8

Olga,a salesperson for Pre-owned Cars & Trucks,Inc.,tells Quincy,"This is the best car I've ever seen." This statement is

Accepted Answer

Olga's statement is an example of puffing, which is a salesperson's exaggerated or subjective opinion about a product, rather than a factual statement about its qualities or characteristics. Puffing is not considered a legally binding warranty.

Question 9

Only the manufacturer of a defective product can be strictly liable for an injury or damage caused by the product.

Accepted Answer

While the manufacturer can be strictly liable, other parties in the supply chain such as distributors and retailers can also be held strictly liable for injuries or damages caused by a defective product.

Question 10

An inadequate warning is not a product defect that will support the imposition of liability on a strict product liability basis.

Accepted Answer

The answer of An inadequate warning is not a product...

Question 11

A public policy underlying the imposition of strict product liability is that a manufacturer who makes an unsafe product should be put out of business.

Accepted Answer

The public policy underlying strict product liability is to encourage manufacturers to make safer products and to ensure that the costs of injuries resulting from defective products are borne by the manufacturers rather than the injured parties. It is not necessarily to put the manufacturer out of business, but to incentivize them to improve their products and safety standards.

Question 12

A public policy underlying the imposition of strict product liability is that consumers should be protected against unsafe products.

Accepted Answer

Strict product liability is a legal doctrine that holds manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of products responsible for harm caused by defects in their products, regardless of whether they were negligent or not. Its underlying public policy is to protect consumers from unsafe products.

Question 13

To support the imposition of strict product liability,a product must be substantially changed from the time it is sold to the time an injury occurs.

Accepted Answer

This statement is incorrect. Strict product liability holds manufacturers and sellers responsible for injuries caused by a product, regardless of whether the product has been changed or modified since it was sold.

Question 14

In many states,the plaintiff's negligence is a defense that may be raised in a product liability suit based on strict liability.

Accepted Answer

In some states, if the plaintiff's negligence contributed to their injury or damages, it can be used as a defense in a product liability suit based on strict liability. This defense is known as comparative negligence. However, the extent to which comparative negligence is considered varies by state.

Question 15

A design defect is not the sort of product defect that will support the imposition of liability on a strict product liability basis.

Accepted Answer

A design defect can support the imposition of liability on a strict product liability basis if it can be shown that the defect rendered the product unreasonably dangerous and caused harm to the user.

Question 16

A product is not so unreasonably dangerous as to support the imposition of liability in a strict product liability suit solely because a less dangerous alternative was commercially feasible but was not produced.

Accepted Answer

The answer of A product is not so unreasonably dangerous...

Question 17

One requirement for a product liability suit based on strict liability is a failure to exercise reasonable care.

Accepted Answer

Strict liability does not require a showing of negligence or a failure to exercise reasonable care. It only requires that the product was defective and caused harm to the plaintiff.

Question 18

Privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is required to bring a product liability suit based on negligence.

Accepted Answer

Privity of contract is not required in product liability suits based on negligence. Third-party individuals who were injured by the product may sue the manufacturer or seller for damages.

Question 19

Strict liability applies to the suppliers of component parts.

Accepted Answer

Strict liability applies to all parties involved in the chain of distribution, including the suppliers of component parts. They can be held liable for any harm caused by their defective parts, regardless of whether they knew of the defect or not.

Question 20

A seller must warn those who buy a product of harm that could result from the foreseeable misuse of the product.

Accepted Answer

This is known as the duty to warn, and it is a legal obligation for sellers to inform consumers of any potential hazards or risks associated with their products. This includes dangers that may not be obvious or may result from a foreseeable misuse of the product.

Quiz 21: Warranties and Product Liability