Question 1

George met with an accident while skiing. He brings a negligence suit against Joe, who rented the skis to George. Which of the following statements is true of this scenario?

Accepted Answer

In a state that has adopted pure comparative negligence, George would be able to recover damages in proportion to Joe's percentage of fault. So, if Joe is 40 percent responsible, George would be able to recover 40 percent of the damages. Option A is incorrect because modified comparative negligence bars recovery if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50 percent at fault. Option C is incorrect as contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery in states that have adopted this rule. Option D is incorrect as proving misuse of the product by George would likely absolve Joe of any liability.

Question 2

Which of the following statements is true of the privity limitation?

Accepted Answer

The privity limitation restricted the plaintiff's ability to recover damages to only those who purchased the defective goods directly from the manufacturer. This means that if the plaintiff bought the product from a retailer or other intermediary, they could not sue the manufacturer for negligence or breach of warranty. The elimination of this requirement expanded the scope of liability for manufacturers and sellers and allowed injured parties to seek damages from them even if they did not have a direct contractual relationship. Therefore, option D is correct.

Question 3

Plaintiffs in product liability cases have traditionally used .

Accepted Answer

B

Question 4

Which of the following is an effect of the growing acceptance of strict liability?

Accepted Answer

Strict liability holds a defendant responsible for harm caused regardless of the level of care taken to prevent it. As a result, negligence has become less important as a theory of liability since it is not relevant to determining liability under strict liability.

Question 5

Which of the following statements is true of the statute of limitations?

Accepted Answer

The statute of limitations is a law that sets a time limit within which a legal action must be brought. It applies to all types of civil actions, including personal injury claims, breach of contract, and property disputes. The time limit varies depending on the type of claim and jurisdiction but typically ranges from one to ten years. Once the statute of limitations expires, the injured party loses the right to sue.

Question 6

Which of the following best describes a statute of repose?

Accepted Answer

A statute of repose sets a deadline for filing a lawsuit based on the time elapsed since a product was purchased or a service was completed, regardless of when the harm occurred.

Question 7

Elimination of the privity requirement led to .

Accepted Answer

The elimination of the privity requirement means that consumers who were not in direct contractual relationship with manufacturers can now sue them for product defects. This has increased the liability of producers as they can now be held liable for any injuries or damages caused by their products, even if the consumer did not purchase directly from them.

Question 8

Which of the following doctrines helps a plaintiff to recover damages when a manufacturer fails to meet the standards imposed by a statute?

Accepted Answer

Negligence per se is a doctrine that allows a plaintiff to recover damages when a defendant violates a statute that was designed to protect a certain class of people or prevent a certain type of harm, and that violation resulted in the plaintiff's injury. In this case, if a manufacturer fails to meet the standards imposed by a statute, it would be considered a violation of the statute and the plaintiff would be able to use the negligence per se doctrine to recover damages.

Question 9

Which of the following is not an essential element in a product liability case based on negligence?

Accepted Answer

Intent is not required for a negligence claim. The essential elements are duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and actual injury or damages suffered by the plaintiff.

Question 10

Which of the following describes the condition in which courts impose liability based on negligent design?

Accepted Answer

Negligent design liability is based on the idea that a manufacturer can be held accountable for a product's design that poses a foreseeable risk of harm. The courts will consider whether the risks of harm posed by the product outweigh the benefits or utility of the product.

Question 11

A statute of _ bars actions arising more than a specified number of years after the cause of action arises, while a statute of _ bars actions arising more than a specified number of years after the product was purchased.

Accepted Answer

A statute of limitations sets the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated, while a statute of repose limits the time within which an action can be brought based on the date of the product's purchase or completion of an act.

Question 12

Which of the following is not a common negligent action leading to product liability case?

Accepted Answer

Negligent intent to harm is not a common negligent action leading to product liability cases as it involves intentional harm rather than negligent behavior. The other options, namely A, C, and D, are common bases for product liability cases that arise due to negligence on part of the manufacturer.

Question 13

In bringing an action for negligence in design, a plaintiff may prove all but which of the following?

Accepted Answer

The most recent consumer preferences are not relevant to a claim for negligence in design. The other options listed can all be used to prove negligence in design.

Question 14

Which of the following statements is true of negligent failure to warn?

Accepted Answer

Manufacturers are generally not required to warn about dangers that arise from unforeseeable misuses of a product, as they cannot predict all possible ways a product might be used incorrectly.

Question 15

Which of the following statements is true of defenses to a negligence-based product liability action?

Accepted Answer

For a misuse of a product to be a valid defense, it must be unreasonable or unforeseeable. The other statements are incorrect. An employee using an unsafe machine at work is not presumed to have assumed the risk, and pure comparative negligence does not bar the plaintiff from recovery but instead reduces the damages awarded based on the degree of fault of the plaintiff. Contributory negligence bars the plaintiff from recovery in some jurisdictions but not in others.

Question 16

In most states, the statute of limitations for tort actions is .

Accepted Answer

In most states, the statute of limitations for tort actions is 2 to 4 years from the date of injury. This means that a person must file a lawsuit within that time period or they may lose their right to sue. Option A is too short a period for most tort actions, while option B is too vague and covers too wide a range of time. Option D is too long and only applies to a few states.

Question 17

Elimination of the privity requirement reflected a shift in .

Accepted Answer

The elimination of the privity requirement meant that manufacturers could now be held liable for injuries caused by their products even if the injured party did not purchase the product directly from the manufacturer. This reflected a shift in social policy toward placing responsibility for injuries on those who market a product that could foreseeably cause harm if proper care were not taken in the manufacturing process.

Question 18

In early product liability cases, the privity limitation meant that the plaintiff was required to demonstrate that .

Accepted Answer

The privity limitation required the plaintiff to demonstrate that he or she purchased the defective product directly from the manufacturer. This meant that if the product was purchased from a retailer or other intermediary, the plaintiff may not have had standing to sue the manufacturer directly.

Question 19

Which of the following is not a common negligent action leading to product liability case?

Accepted Answer

Negligent infliction of emotional distress is not a common negligent action leading to product liability case. The other options (negligent manufacture, negligent testing or failure to test, and negligent advertising) are common examples of negligent actions that can lead to product liability cases.

Question 20

Which of the following refers to a scenario in which courts will impose liability due to negligent design?

Accepted Answer

Negligent design refers to a scenario in which a product's design is inherently flawed and poses a risk of harm even when used as intended. In such cases, courts will impose liability if a reasonable person concludes that despite any warnings given with the product, the risk of harm outweighed the utility of the product as designed.

Quiz 12: Product and Service Liability Law

George met with an accident while skiing. He brings a negligence suit against Joe, who rented the skis to George. Which of the following statements is true of this scenario?

Which of the following statements is true of the privity limitation?

Plaintiffs in product liability cases have traditionally used .

Which of the following is an effect of the growing acceptance of strict liability?

Which of the following statements is true of the statute of limitations?

Which of the following best describes a statute of repose?

Elimination of the privity requirement led to .

Which of the following doctrines helps a plaintiff to recover damages when a manufacturer fails to meet the standards imposed by a statute?

Which of the following is not an essential element in a product liability case based on negligence?

Which of the following describes the condition in which courts impose liability based on negligent design?

A statute of _ bars actions arising more than a specified number of years after the cause of action arises, while a statute of _ bars actions arising more than a specified number of years after the product was purchased.

Which of the following is not a common negligent action leading to product liability case?

In bringing an action for negligence in design, a plaintiff may prove all but which of the following?

Which of the following statements is true of negligent failure to warn?

Which of the following statements is true of defenses to a negligence-based product liability action?

In most states, the statute of limitations for tort actions is .

Elimination of the privity requirement reflected a shift in .

In early product liability cases, the privity limitation meant that the plaintiff was required to demonstrate that .

Which of the following is not a common negligent action leading to product liability case?

Which of the following refers to a scenario in which courts will impose liability due to negligent design?