In Parish v. ICON, where a person was severely injured when jumping on a trampoline and sued its maker and the maker of a safety net for failure to warn, the Iowa high court held that:
A) the makers had no duty to warn because the danger was obvious
B) the makers had a poorly designed set of instructions, so could be liable
C) the makers had failed to produce any warnings, so were liable
D) produced products that should never have been placed on the market because they are so dangerous that warnings are unhelpful
E) none of the other choices
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q267: In Parish v. ICON, where a person
Q268: When considering the risk-utility balance, courts consider:
A)
Q269: The Restatement (Third) of Torts on product
Q270: In Parish v. ICON, where a person
Q271: The Restatement (Third) of Torts refers to
Q273: The Restatement (Third) of Torts on product
Q274: The Restatement (Third) of Torts on product
Q275: To minimize the likelihood of being liable
Q276: The Restatement (Third) of Torts refers to
Q277: A manufacturing defect is one which:
A) occurred
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