As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true regarding the consumer expectations test for product defect?
A) That if the plaintiff, applying the knowledge of an ordinary consumer, sees the danger and can appreciate that danger, then he cannot recover for any injury resulting from that appreciated danger.
B) That a plaintiff cannot recover if a reasonable person would conclude that the danger in fact of the product, whether foreseeable or not, outweighs the utility of the product.
C) That a plaintiff may only recover if the plaintiff was the purchaser of the product causing injury.
D) That a plaintiff may only recover if consumer oriented household goods are involved.
E) That a plaintiff may only recover if the plaintiff reasonably expected the manufacturer to have insurance, that the manufacturer did have insurance of the type to cover the injury at issue, and that the plaintiff had no part in causing the injury.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q52: [Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase
Q53: [Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase
Q54: What was the ruling of the court
Q55: [Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase
Q56: Kobi was a budding young tennis star.
Q58: When is expert testimony admissible in product
Q59: Which theory might allow a plaintiff to
Q60: [Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase
Q61: [Disappointing Boat Purchase] Ava went to purchase
Q62: [Allergy Injuries] Drug company ABC Drugs introduced
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents