Question 1

In the In Re L.B.Trucking, Inc.case:
A) warranty provisions of the UCC did not apply because the sale of goods was merely incidental to the service aspect of the contract.
B) Thomas's statements were found by the court to be mere puffing or sales talk.
C) Southern States was found to have breached both express and implied warranties.
D) Durham did not rely on Thomas's statements, so they could not be considered warranties.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In the In Re L.B.Trucking, Inc.case:
A) warranty...

Question 2

Which of the following would constitute a defect within the meaning of 402A of the Restatement?
A) A chair with legs designed to be attached with screws and glue but lacking the screws.
B) A small car designed to have the fuel tank next to the rear axle.
C) A flammable liquid bottled in a container without a warning label to warn users of the flammability.
D) All of these are defects within the meaning of 402A.

Accepted Answer

All of these examples illustrate different types of defects as understood under section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts: manufacturing defects (A), design defects (B), and warning defects (C).

Question 3

Which of the following would most likely be a defect under 402A of the Restatement of Torts?
A) A chair produced without inserting the appropriate screws.
B) A product with a defective design that is nevertheless the "state of the art."
C) Vodka that is 100 proof and makes people drunk and causes liver damage after years of heavy use.
D) All of these are defects under 402A.

Accepted Answer

A chair produced without inserting the appropriate screws is a manufacturing defect because it deviates from the manufacturer's intended design or specifications, which is a type of defect recognized under § 402A of the Restatement of Torts. Choices B and C describe situations that generally would not be considered defects under § 402A: B involves a potential design defect that is state of the art (and thus may not be considered unreasonably dangerous), and C involves an inherent risk of a product (vodka) that is known to consumers.

Question 4

Whether an implied warranty arises out of the circumstances under which the parties enter into a contract may depend on:
A) the type of contract entered into.
B) the seller's merchant or non-merchant status.
C) applicability of other statutes.
D) All of these.
E) None of these.

Accepted Answer

An implied warranty can indeed arise based on the type of contract, the status of the seller as a merchant or non-merchant, and the applicability of other statutes. These factors influence the expectations and obligations implicit in the transaction.

Question 5

Which of the following is generally NOT a defense to a claim against a manufacturer under 402A?
A) Contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff.
B) Express voluntary assumption of the risk.
C) Misuse or abuse of the product.
D) Subsequent alteration of the product by the plaintiff.

Accepted Answer

Under Section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff is generally not a defense to a strict liability claim against a manufacturer. This is because strict liability focuses on the condition of the product itself, rather than the behavior of the plaintiff.

Question 6

Which of the following products would impose strict liability in tort according to Section 402A?
A) Popcorn containing large amounts of genuine butter.
B) 150-proof Virgin Island rum.
C) A chainsaw sold with the safety shielding removed.
D) A Ferrari capable of speeds in excess of 150 mph.

Accepted Answer

Section 402A imposes strict liability on products that are defectively manufactured, defectively designed, or fail to warn of known dangers. In this case, the chainsaw was sold with the safety shielding removed, which could be considered a defect in manufacture or design. Popcorn, rum, and a Ferrari are not inherently dangerous products, and therefore would not necessarily impose strict liability.

Question 7

Which of the following is NOT included within the Code definition of merchantability?
A) Reasonably fit for the ordinary purposes for which the goods are used.
B) Pass without objection in the trade under the contract description.
C) In the case of fungible goods that they be of a quality that exceeds the description and be above average.
D) Be of fair, average quality.

Accepted Answer

The Code definition of merchantability includes options A, B, and D. Option C is not included in the definition.

Question 8

Sandy rented a lawn mower from Scott Rentals.The lawn mower wheel was loose when Sandy picked up the mower.When she began to use it, the wheel fell off, causing the mower to tip over onto her foot.Under what theory can Sandy hold Scott liable for her injuries?
A) Breach of warranty of merchantability.
B) Strict liability in tort for a defective condition.
C) Both of these are applicable.
D) Neither theory is applicable to leases.

Accepted Answer

Both breach of warranty of merchantability and strict liability in tort for a defective condition can apply. The warranty of merchantability implies that the rented item is fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used. Strict liability in tort for a defective condition applies because the lawn mower had a defect (loose wheel) that made it unsafe for its intended use.

Question 9

Terrell asks a salesperson what size of water heater he should buy for a twenty-unit motel.If Terrell purchases a tank based on the salesperson's suggestion, the salesperson's recommendation is:
A) an express warranty of merchantability regarding the water heater.
B) an implied warranty of merchantability regarding the water heater.
C) an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
D) no warranty, but only a statement of opinion.

Accepted Answer

The salesperson's recommendation for a specific size of water heater for a 20-unit motel implies that the water heater is fit for a particular purpose, which is to supply adequate hot water to all the units in the motel. Therefore, the salesperson's suggestion is an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

Question 10

Leslie purchased 100 flower pots from a local merchant.Warranties which are not included in her sales contract, but exist by "operation of law," are the:
A) express warranties.
B) exclusive warranties.
C) quasi warranties.
D) implied warranties.

Accepted Answer

The warranties that exist by "operation of law" are implied warranties.

Question 11

Mark tells Leslie that his sweeper has a four-stage allergen filtration system because he was told that when he bought it.Leslie buys the sweeper from Mark, but it does not have the four-stage allergen filtration system.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 sweeper would filter virtually all allergens because of the four stages.
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 product he was selling to Leslie, which misled her into buying it. This is known as breach of warranty, and Mark is liable for it. It doesn't matter whether or not he knew the statement was false, as he made a claim about the product that was incorrect.

Question 12

Implied warranties under the Code:
A) depend on the type of contract or sale entered into.
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 are dependent on the type of contract or sale entered into. There are different implied warranties for different types of sales, such as the warranty of merchantability for the sale of goods by a merchant, or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose for goods sold that are intended to be used for a specific purpose as specified by the buyer.

Question 13

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) a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

Accepted Answer

A warranty of merchantability is 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. This warranty is implied by law and does not need to be explicitly stated in the sales contract.

Question 14

The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability, which supersedes Section 402A of the Second Restatement of Torts, is far more comprehensive than the Second Restatement in dealing with the liability of commercial sellers and distributors of goods for harm caused by their products.

Accepted Answer

The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability is indeed more comprehensive than the Second Restatement in dealing with the liability of commercial sellers and distributors of goods for harm caused by their products.

Question 15

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 depending on the buyer's needs and opinions. Express warranties are statements or promises made by the seller about the product that become part of the basis of the bargain between the buyer and seller, and are meant to assure the buyer of the product's quality and performance. Restating facts, stating product specifications, and providing an expert opinion about a product are all examples of express warranties.

Question 16

Eric bought a new snowmobile from the North Pole Manufacturing Company.After buying the machine, Eric then modified it 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.Eric now wants to sue North Pole for strict liability.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 snowmobile after purchasing it, which could have altered its original design and safety features. This may make it difficult for him to prove that the manufacturer was strictly liable for his injuries. Additionally, if Eric assumed the risk of using the snowmobile, he may not be able to successfully sue for damages.

Question 17

The warranty of title for the sale of goods found in the Code:
A) may be excluded with the phrase "as is."
B) will vest title under Article 2A.
C) may not be excluded or modified by the seller.
D) will apply regardless of whether it is provided for in the contract unless the parties have specifically excluded it or certain circumstances exist.

Accepted Answer

The warranty of title for the sale of goods cannot be excluded or modified by the seller under Article 2 of the UCC. It will apply automatically unless the parties specifically exclude it or certain circumstances exist.

Question 18

Matt tells Ron that the snow boots he is selling are capable of protection at temperatures of 20° below zero.Ron orders a pair for his trip to Greenland.Upon delivery 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 latter 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

Ron has a strong case for breach of warranty because the box stated that the boots are capable of protecting feet in temperatures down to 30 below zero, but Ron suffered frostbite when temperatures were only 27 below zero. This is a breach of the express warranty made by Matt. The fact that Matt originally stated the boots were capable of protection at 20° below zero is irrelevant, as the box made a different, stronger warranty.

Question 19

An express warranty within the meaning of the Code is created by which of the following?
A) A sample.
B) A description.
C) A promise.
D) All of these.

Accepted Answer

An express warranty can be created by a sample, a description, or a promise regarding the goods, according to the Uniform Commercial Code.

Question 20

Strict product liability exists if:
A) the consumer misuses the product.
B) the consumer alters the product before he or she uses it.
C) a defective, unreasonably dangerous product reaches the consumer or user without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.
D) the consumer gives the manufacturer or seller notice of the defect.

Accepted Answer

Strict product liability holds a manufacturer or seller strictly liable for harm caused by their defective, unreasonably dangerous product reaching the consumer without substantial change from the condition in which it was sold. Misuse or alteration by the consumer is not relevant to strict liability. Notice of the defect may be relevant in a negligence or breach of warranty claim, but it is not necessary for strict liability.

Quiz 22: Product Liability: Warranties and Strict Liability

In the In Re L.B.Trucking, Inc.case:

Which of the following would constitute a defect within the meaning of 402A of the Restatement?

Which of the following would most likely be a defect under 402A of the Restatement of Torts?

Whether an implied warranty arises out of the circumstances under which the parties enter into a contract may depend on:

Which of the following is generally NOT a defense to a claim against a manufacturer under 402A?

Which of the following products would impose strict liability in tort according to Section 402A?

Which of the following is NOT included within the Code definition of merchantability?

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

Terrell asks a salesperson what size of water heater he should buy for a twenty-unit motel.If Terrell purchases a tank based on the salesperson's suggestion, the salesperson's recommendation is:

Leslie purchased 100 flower pots from a local merchant.Warranties which are not included in her sales contract, but exist by "operation of law," are the:

Mark tells Leslie that his sweeper has a four-stage allergen filtration system because he was told that when he bought it.Leslie buys the sweeper from Mark, but it does not have the four-stage allergen filtration system.Is Mark liable for breach of warranty?

Implied warranties under the Code:

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:

The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability, which supersedes Section 402A of the Second Restatement of Torts, is far more comprehensive than the Second Restatement in dealing with the liability of commercial sellers and distributors of goods for harm caused by their products.

Which of the following is not an express warranty?

The warranty of title for the sale of goods found in the Code:

An express warranty within the meaning of the Code is created by which of the following?

Strict product liability exists if: