Question 1

Matt tells Ron that the snow boots he is selling offer protection for temperatures of 20° below zero. Ron orders a pair for his trip to Greenland. Upon delivery, Ron sees that the box states "will protect your feet in temperatures down to 30° below zero." The first night's temperature goes down to 27 below. Ron suffers frostbite on all of his toes. Ron then sues for breach of warranty. What is the result?
A) Breach, because the later express warranty is valid.
B) No breach, because Matt's statement was merely opinion.
C) No breach, because Matt said 20° below zero.
D) No breach, because Matt is allowed to be wrong.

Accepted Answer

The later express warranty on the box takes precedence over Matt's initial statement. Ron relied on this statement and suffered harm as a result, making it a breach of warranty.

Question 2

Product liability exists if the:
A) consumer misuses the product.
B) consumer alters the product before he or she uses it.
C) product reaches the consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.
D) consumer takes the product gratuitously.

Accepted Answer

Product liability holds manufacturers and sellers responsible for any injuries or damages caused by a defective product that reaches the consumer in the same condition in which it was sold, regardless of the consumer's use or misuse of the product. Therefore, options A, B, and D do not apply to product liability.

Question 3

A, a wholesale distributor, sells to B, a retail dealer, a set of defective tires manufactured by X, a reputable manufacturer. Both A and B believed the tires to be in perfect condition, although neither party has inspected the tires. C purchases the tires from B and is injured because the defective tires blew out. Who, if anyone, is liable to C in strict liability?
A) A, B, and X share liability to C under strict liability.
B) Only X, who manufactured the tires, has strict liability.
C) Only B, who sold the defective tires to C, has strict liability.
D) No one has strict liability in this case.

Accepted Answer

In strict liability, all parties involved in the chain of distribution can be held liable for any injuries or damages caused by a defective product, regardless of fault or negligence. In this case, A, who sold the defective tires to B, and X, the manufacturer, are both liable for C's injuries. B may also be liable if they could have reasonably inspected the tires and discovered the defect before selling them to C. Therefore, all parties (A, B, and X) share liability under strict liability.

Question 4

In bringing a warranty action, the buyer must prove:
A) whether the warranty was express or implied.
B) that breach of the warranty proximately caused the loss suffered.
C) reliance on the affirmations, promises, descriptions, samples, or models the seller made or used.
D) All of these.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In bringing a warranty action, the buyer...

Question 5

Alice is browsing in a commercial art gallery when she sees a painting that she likes. Roger, who is the manager of the gallery, tells her that the painting is a genuine Leroy Neiman work. Based upon that representation, Alice buys the work for $5,000. She later discovers that the painting is only a cheap copy of the original that is worth no more than $50. Roger has breached:
A) an express warranty to Alice that the painting is a Neiman work.
B) the warranty of merchantability.
C) no express warranties, because his statement was merely an opinion.
D) an express warranty, the warranty of merchantability, and the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

Accepted Answer

Roger made an express warranty to Alice that the painting is a genuine Leroy Neiman work. An express warranty is a representation made by a seller of goods that becomes a part of the basis of the bargain. Since Alice relied on this representation in making the purchase, Roger has breached the express warranty. The warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose do not apply in this case, as they are implied warranties and do not depend on any representations made by the seller.

Question 6

Which of the following is not an express warranty?
A) Restating facts or market figures about a product
B) The opinion of an expert in a certain field regarding a product in that field
C) A statement of the product specifications
D) The seller's opinion of the value of goods

Accepted Answer

The seller's opinion of the value of goods is not an express warranty because it is subjective and can vary based on different factors. It is not a specific statement or promise about the product itself.

Question 7

Answer the following: _a_.Under the Code, what constitutes an "express" warranty? Does an express warranty have to arise through words? Which of the following would be an express warranty? Explain. (1) This is the best computer available in town. (2) This car has new brakes. (3) This sample is just like the one in the box. b. (4) In my opinion, this is a better video recorder than the one made by this competitor. (5) As a mechanic, I think this car is in good running order and should give you no problems for at least three months.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Answer the following: _a_.Under the Code,...

Question 8

Implied warranties under the Code:
A) may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.
B) are a result of specific language in the sales contract.
C) continue the common law rule of caveat emptor.
D) are intended to protect the seller rather than the buyer.

Accepted Answer

Implied warranties under the Code can arise from course of dealing or usage of trade. They are not necessarily a result of specific language in the sales contract, nor do they continue the common law rule of caveat emptor. While they do protect the buyer, they also provide some protection for the seller by establishing certain standards and expectations for the sale of goods.

Question 9

Geoff's fiancée, Susan, comes to meet his parents for the weekend. On Saturday morning, while using Geoff's mother's hair dryer, the blower short-circuits sending sparks across the guest room. Susan's angora sweater and her hands are covered with tiny burns. Susan's mother is a lawyer and wants her to sue the seller of the dryer for breach of warranty. Can she?
A) No, because horizontal privity would extend only to members of the family.
B) No, because privity would require that Geoff's mother sue.
C) Yes, since she is a guest in the home of the buyer, the warranties would extend to her in most states.
D) Yes, since under the Code all reasonable users are protected from injury.

Accepted Answer

In most states, implied warranties extend not only to the buyer but also to any guest who might reasonably be expected to use the product. Therefore, Susan would be able to sue the seller of the hair dryer for breach of warranty. This is known as the "extended privity" doctrine.

Question 10

Eric bought a new snowmobile from the North Pole Manufacturing Company. After buying the machine, Eric then modified the spark plugs and a few other things in order to soup it up. In February, just after a snowfall, Eric was driving the snowmobile when it tipped over, trapping him beneath it. His leg was severely burned when it lodged against one of the spark plugs. Eric now wants to sue North Pole for strict liability in tort. Eric:
A) will likely win the suit, because of the faulty design of the snowmobile.
B) will likely lose the suit, because the machine has been altered since its manufacture.
C) has assumed the risk of using the snowmobile.
D) cannot sue the manufacturer, because horizontal privity is lacking.

Accepted Answer

Eric modified the spark plugs and other things on the snowmobile after purchasing it, which means the machine was altered from its original design by North Pole Manufacturing Company. As a result, it is difficult to determine whether the accident was caused by faulty design by North Pole or by Eric's modifications. Therefore, Eric would likely lose the suit.

Question 11

Mark tells Leslie that his stereo has quadraphonic speakers because he was told that when he bought it. Leslie buys the stereo, but it does not have quadraphonic speakers. Is Mark liable for breach of warranty?
A) No, because he did not know his statement was false.
B) No, because he did not promise her that the speakers were quadraphonic.
C) Yes, because the statement was false.
D) Yes, because Mark was not acting in good faith.

Accepted Answer

Mark made a false statement about the stereo having quadraphonic speakers. This statement can be considered as a breach of warranty.

Question 12

Greg has been in the business of selling encyclopedias for twenty years. Margaret agreed to buy a set if Greg would also bring her a bookcase for them. Greg bought one and sold it to Margaret along with the books. While shelving the books, she ran her hand over the back edge of the shelves and cut herself severely. The wood was not finished on that side and nails were protruding through the shelf. Can Margaret sue Greg under strict liability?
A) Yes, because the bookcase was in an unreasonably dangerous condition.
B) Yes, because the bookcase was defective.
C) No, because she was not a true consumer under Section 402A.
D) No, because Greg is not a seller under Section 402A.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Greg has been in the business of...

Question 13

Answer the following: a. What is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act? _b_._What_is_a_statute_of_repose?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Answer the following:
a. What is the Magnuson-Moss...

Question 14

An obligation of the merchant-seller that the goods are reasonably fit for general purposes for which they are manufactured and sold, and the goods are of fair, average quality is known as:
A) a warranty of merchantability.
B) strict liability.
C) an express warranty.
D) the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

Accepted Answer

This obligation is known as a warranty of merchantability. It is implied in the sale of goods unless specifically disclaimed by the seller. This warranty ensures that the goods being sold are of an average quality and are reasonably fit for their intended purpose.

Question 15

No implied warranty exists:
A) if it is disclaimed in any manner.
B) if it applies to hidden defects that are not apparent upon examination.
C) as to defects that an examination ought to have revealed, where the buyer examined the goods as fully as he desired or where the buyer refused to examine the goods.
D) All of these.

Accepted Answer

The answer of No implied warranty exists:
A) if it is...

Question 16

Which Code section contains the warranty of merchantability?
A) 2-205
B) 2-207
C) 2-312
D) 2-314

Accepted Answer

Section 2-314 of the Uniform Commercial Code contains the warranty of merchantability. This section states that when a merchant sells goods, they implicitly warrant that the goods are fit for their ordinary purpose and of a quality that is generally acceptable in the trade. This means that the goods must be of a reasonable quality and must be appropriate for their intended use.

Question 17

Article 2A carries over the warranty provisions of Article 2 with relatively minor revision to reflect differences in:
A) style.
B) leasing terminology.
C) leasing practices.
D) All of these.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Article 2A carries over the warranty provisions...

Question 18

Karen decided to sell her stair step exercise machine, because she wasn't using it as much as she thought she would. Her friend Lydia bought it from Karen for $100. If the first day that Lydia used the stair stepper it fell apart, injuring
Lydia's ankle:
A) Lydia can sue Karen for breach of the warranty of merchantability, because the stair stepper is not fit for its ordinary purpose.
B) Karen can sue the manufacturer for breach of the warranty of merchantability, because she was the original buyer.
C) Lydia cannot sue Karen for warranting that the stair stepper is reasonably fit for its ordinary purpose, because Karen is not a merchant.
D) Lydia cannot sue Karen, because they are not in privity of contract.

Accepted Answer

DC) Lydia cannot sue Karen for warranting that the stair stepper is reasonably fit for its ordinary purpose because Karen is not a merchant. The warranty of merchantability typically applies to sellers who are merchants of the goods sold. Since Karen is a private individual and not a merchant, this warranty does not apply.D) The concept of privity of contract does not prevent Lydia from suing Karen because privity of contract refers to the relationship between parties in a contract, and Lydia and Karen do have a contract between them (the sale of the stair stepper). However, Lydia cannot sue Karen based on the warranty of merchantability for the reason mentioned in C.

Question 19

Kera rented a lawn mower from Scott Rentals. The mower wheel was loose when she picked it up. When she began to use the mower, the wheel fell off, causing the mower to tip over onto her foot. Under what theory can Kera hold Scott liable for her injuries?
A) Breach of warranty of merchantability
B) Breach of warranty of title
C) Strict liability in tort for a defective design
D) All of these.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Kera rented a lawn mower from Scott...

Question 20

Hubert bought heavy-duty, sharp hedge clippers to trim the hedges in his yard. In the process of using the clippers, he severely cut his hand. He is now suing the manufacturer on the basis that the clippers are unreasonably dangerous. Can he recover? Explain.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Hubert bought heavy-duty, sharp hedge clippers to...

Quiz 24: Products Liability: Warranties and Strict Liability in Tort

Product liability exists if the:

In bringing a warranty action, the buyer must prove:

Which of the following is not an express warranty?

Implied warranties under the Code:

Mark tells Leslie that his stereo has quadraphonic speakers because he was told that when he bought it. Leslie buys the stereo, but it does not have quadraphonic speakers. Is Mark liable for breach of warranty?

Answer the following: a. What is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act? b. What is a statute of repose?

An obligation of the merchant-seller that the goods are reasonably fit for general purposes for which they are manufactured and sold, and the goods are of fair, average quality is known as:

No implied warranty exists:

Which Code section contains the warranty of merchantability?

Article 2A carries over the warranty provisions of Article 2 with relatively minor revision to reflect differences in:

Karen decided to sell her stair step exercise machine, because she wasn't using it as much as she thought she would. Her friend Lydia bought it from Karen for $100. If the first day that Lydia used the stair stepper it fell apart, injuring Lydia's ankle:

Kera rented a lawn mower from Scott Rentals. The mower wheel was loose when she picked it up. When she began to use the mower, the wheel fell off, causing the mower to tip over onto her foot. Under what theory can Kera hold Scott liable for her injuries?

Hubert bought heavy-duty, sharp hedge clippers to trim the hedges in his yard. In the process of using the clippers, he severely cut his hand. He is now suing the manufacturer on the basis that the clippers are unreasonably dangerous. Can he recover? Explain.

Answer the following: a. What is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act? _b_._What_is_a_statute_of_repose?