As Recognized by the Court in Sperry-New Holland V

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?

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.