BLAW - Chapter 25 - Class # 28 Warranties The liability of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Class # 28 Warranties The liability of manufacturers and sellers of goods for a defective product, or for its failure to perform adequately may be based on one or more of the following: (1) misrepresentation (fraud), (2) negligence, (3) negligence per se (4) strict product liability, (5) warranty Fraudulent Misrepresentation: To prove fraud on the part of the seller, the buyer would have to demonstrate both intent and knowledge of falsity. Specifically, the plaintiff must establish: 1. A party knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth, misrepresented material facts and conditions 2. The party intended to have other parties rely on the misrepresentations 3. The injured party reasonably relied on the misrepresentations 4. The injured party suffered damages because of the reliance on the misrepresentations 5. A direct link exists between the injuries suffered and the reliance on the misrepresentations Negligence: In order to win a negligence case, the plaintiff must establish the following : 1. the defendant owed a duty or standard of care to the plaintiff , consistent with the actions of a “reasonable person” in the same or a similar situation; 2. the defendant breached the duty or standard of care owed to the plaintiff, in the sense that the defendant failed to act like a “reasonable person;” o Carelessly designed the product, Carelessly manufactured it, Failure to provide adequate warnings, 3. the defendant’s conduct caused plaintiff harm; and 4. the plaintiff suffered compensable damages as a result of the defendant’s conduct. Negligence Per se: Failure to meet a standard established by statute or regulation when a law establishing labeling, design, or content requirements for products, the manufacturer has a duty to meet those requirements Strict Product Liability: In many states, proof of negligence is not necessary because they allow claims for strict product liability. A seller of a product is liable without fault for personal injuries (or other physical harm) caused by the product if the product is sold in a defective condition. The primary difference between a regular negligence action and a strict product liability action is that negligence focuses on whether the manufacturer conduct or actions were that of a “reasonable” person. Strict product liability focuses on the product and asks whether the product is unreasonably dangerous because of its defects. In order to successfully sue a defendant product manufacturer and/or seller for strict liability, the plaintiff must show (1) that the product was defective when it was sold, (2) that the product was so defective it was unreasonably dangerous, (3) and that the product foreseeably caused the plaintiff’s harm. A product can be defective in the same way that it caused harm due to the manufacturer’s negligence; that is it can
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/31/2010 for the course ACCT 1237 taught by Professor Hillman during the Spring '10 term at Drake University .

Page1 / 4

BLAW - Chapter 25 - Class # 28 Warranties The liability of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online