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 a plaintiff must show that a retailer failed to do a proper risk-utility analysis before the plaintiff can recover against the retailer.
B) 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.
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 reasonable person must conclude that the use-in-fact of a product outweighs the risk-utility of the product.
E) 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.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q51: As recognized by the court in Sperry-New
Q52: Which of the following is true regarding
Q53: Kobi was thrilled about his first new
Q54: When an individual glass bottle of soda
Q55: What was the ruling of the court
Q57: Which statement is true regarding a lawsuit
Q58: In a product liability action in which
Q59: [Squirt Gun Mishap] Marie decided to purchase
Q60: What was the Supreme Court of California's
Q61: If Alessia is awarded a million dollars
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