FYLSX Strict and Products Liability 2

Question 1

A manufacturer sells a power saw with a blade guard that can be easily removed without tools.
A user removes the guard and is injured.
Under strict products liability, which factor most favors the manufacturer?

Accepted Answer

The user's removal of the guard was an unforeseeable misuse

Answer

The product was sold without adequate warnings

Answer

The guard was a safety feature, not a defect

Answer

The product was unreasonably dangerous as designed

Question 2

Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, which of the following sellers is NOT subject to strict products liability?

Accepted Answer

A casual seller who occasionally sells used goods

Answer

A retail store that sold a defective appliance

Answer

A manufacturer that produced a faulty product

Answer

A distributor in the chain of commercial distribution

Question 3

A plaintiff sues a drug company under strict products liability for a prescription drug that caused serious side effects. The drug carried appropriate warnings to physicians. Under the learned intermediary doctrine, the court will most likely:

Accepted Answer

Find the manufacturer's duty to warn was satisfied by warning the prescribing physician

Answer

Hold the manufacturer strictly liable for failure to warn consumers directly

Answer

Require the manufacturer to prove the plaintiff assumed the risk

Answer

Apply negligence instead of strict liability to prescription drugs

Question 4

A consumer purchases a bottle of soda that explodes in her hand due to excessive carbonation pressure. She sues the bottler under strict liability. The bottler argues the bottle was inspected and met industry standards. This defense is:

Accepted Answer

Invalid, because strict liability does not require proof of negligence

Answer

Valid, because meeting industry standards negates strict liability

Answer

Valid, because the consumer assumed the risk of carbonated beverages

Answer

Invalid, because the bottler failed to warn of explosion risks

Question 5

A child is injured by a toy that was safe for ages 8 and older but was marketed to children of all ages without age warnings. This is best characterized as a:

Accepted Answer

Warning defect (failure to warn)

Answer

Manufacturing defect

Answer

Design defect

Answer

Breach of express warranty only

Question 6

Under strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, which element is NOT required?

Accepted Answer

The defendant acted negligently in conducting the activity

Answer

The activity creates a risk of serious harm

Answer

The risk cannot be eliminated by reasonable care

Answer

The activity is inappropriate for the location where it is conducted

Question 7

A pet store sells a monkey that bites a customer a week after purchase. The customer sues under strict liability for wild animal ownership. The store argues the monkey had never bitten anyone before. This defense is:

Accepted Answer

Invalid because strict liability applies to wild animals regardless of prior behavior

Answer

Valid under the one-bite rule which limits strict liability

Answer

Valid if the store lacked knowledge of the monkey's dangerous propensity

Answer

Invalid only if the monkey was classified as an inherently dangerous species