Question 1

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 against strict liability claims for product defects. This is because strict liability focuses on the condition of the product at the time it leaves the manufacturer's control, rather than on the behavior of the plaintiff.

Question 2

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

The obligation described is commonly referred to as the warranty of merchantability, which is an implied warranty that arises from the fact that the seller is a merchant who regularly deals in goods of the type sold. This warranty ensures that the goods are fit for their ordinary purpose and that they meet a reasonable level of quality.

Question 3

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 depend on the type of contract or sale entered into, as stated in Section 2-314 of the Uniform Commercial Code. These warranties are automatically implied into the contract, without the need for specific language in the sales contract, and are intended to protect the buyer rather than the seller, contrary to the common law rule of caveat emptor.

Question 4

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 sweeper having a four-stage allergen filtration system. As a result, he is liable for breach of warranty. It does not matter whether Mark knew the statement was false or not; he made a false statement and can be held liable.

Question 5

Karen decided to sell her stair step exerciser, because she wasn't using it as much as she thought she would. Her friend Lydia bought it from Karen for $100. The first day that Lydia used the exerciser, it fell apart, injuring Lydia's ankle. Lydia:
A) can sue Karen for breach of the warranty of merchantability, because the exerciser is not fit for the ordinary purpose intended.
B) cannot sue Karen for breach of the warranty of merchantability, because Karen did not expressly warrant the quality of the exerciser.
C) cannot sue Karen for the warranty of merchantability because this warranty was not implied in this situation.
D) cannot sue Karen, because they are not in privity of contract.

Accepted Answer

C) The warranty of merchantability typically applies to merchants or sellers engaged in the business of selling the goods in question. Since Karen is a private individual selling a used item, the warranty of merchantability would not be implied in this private sale.

Question 6

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 through a sample, description, or promise made by the seller. Therefore, all of the choices create an express warranty.

Question 7

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, which means that the manufacturer cannot be held strictly liable for any defects that may have been introduced as a result of those modifications. Strict liability applies only to products that are in the same condition as they were when they left the manufacturer's control.

Question 8

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

Implied warranties are created by law and automatically apply to the sale of goods, even if they are not explicitly stated in the sales contract. Common types of implied warranties include the implied warranty of merchantability (which ensures that the goods are fit for their ordinary purpose) and the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose (which applies when the buyer makes known a specific purpose for which the goods are needed).

Question 9

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

Bob can hold Scott liable under both breach of warranty of merchantability, as the mower was not fit for its ordinary purpose, and strict liability in tort for a defective condition, as the defect (loose wheel) caused injury.

Question 10

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 the options listed can be considered defects within the meaning of 402A of the Restatement. A chair without screws may be dangerous and cause the chair to collapse, leading to injury to the user. A fuel tank next to the rear axle has the potential to be dangerous in the event of an accident, as it may increase the risk of fire or explosion. A flammable liquid without a warning label can be dangerous as users may not be aware of the potential hazards and may not take necessary precautions.

Question 11

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 under Article 2 of the UCC applies automatically to a sale of goods, regardless of whether it is mentioned in the contract. It cannot be excluded by the seller, and only certain circumstances (such as a buyer knowing that the seller has no right to sell the goods) can override it.

Question 12

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,...

Question 13

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

All of these factors can impact whether an implied warranty arises under a contract. The type of contract and applicability of other statutes may establish specific warranties, while the seller's merchant or non-merchant status can impact whether certain implied warranties apply. Therefore, all of these factors should be considered in determining whether an implied warranty exists.

Question 14

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 product that is produced without proper assembly (in this case, inserting screws) would be considered a manufacturing defect under 402A of the Restatement of Torts. Option B describes a design defect that is not necessarily a defect unless there is a feasible and safer alternative design. Option C describes an inherent danger of the product, but it is not necessarily a defect if the danger is well known and the product is properly labeled with warning.

Question 15

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

According to Section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, a seller who sells any product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or to his property is strictly liable to the user or consumer. A chainsaw sold with safety shielding removed would be an example of a product sold in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user and therefore impose strict liability in tort.

Question 16

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 suggestion is an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose because Terrell specifically asked for a recommendation for a water heater to suit the needs of his twenty-unit motel, indicating a particular purpose for the purchase.

Question 17

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

A seller's opinion of value is not an express warranty because it is subjective and does not relate to the specific qualities or characteristics of the product itself. The other choices involve specific statements about the product and its attributes, which can be considered express warranties.

Question 18

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 exists when a defective and unreasonably dangerous product reaches the consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold. This means that even if the consumer misuses the product or alters it before use, the manufacturer or seller can still be held liable for any harm caused. Notice of the defect is not necessarily required for strict product liability to be applied.

Question 19

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 relied on Matt's statement that the boots would protect in temperatures of 20° below zero. However, the delivered product stated protection down to 30° below zero. This creates an express warranty that the boots will provide protection in temperatures down to that level. Ron suffered harm while using the product, indicating a breach of warranty.

Question 20

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, but not option C. The definition of merchantability states that goods must be of fair, average quality and reasonably fit for their ordinary purposes, and must pass in the trade without objection. However, there is no requirement that fungible goods be of a quality that exceeds the description or be above average.

Quiz 22: Product Liability: Warranties and Strict Liability

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

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:

Implied warranties under the Code:

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?

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

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

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:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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:

Which of the following is not an express warranty?

Strict product liability exists if:

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