Week 7 Draft Research Paper

docx

School

Wilmington University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

340

Subject

Business

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by UltraGazelle3953

Week 7 Draft Research Paper Wilmington University Bla 303 Introduction

Damages sustained by consumers because of a company's wares are subject to financial compensation under "product liability" laws. In her extensive list of possible theories and grounds for proving strict liability in tort, promise breach and negligence instances, Adams provides a wealth of information (Adams para. 1, 1989). In two cases, Greenman v. Yuba Power Goods Inc. and Kosters v. Seven-Up Co., plaintiffs said that they had suffered injuries because of corporations' defective goods. The manufacturers' negligence led to the defective goods, as was later shown. Strict responsibility was established in the landmark case of Greenman v. Yuba Power Products Inc., ruled by the California Supreme Court. Governments now base most product liability claims on this methodology. Product liability litigants encounter fewer roadblocks when they stick to the premise of seeking accountability, according to Cheeseman's 2019 essay on page 116. There are two schools of thought that address these concerns: ethical fundamentalism and Kantian ethics. There can be no room for unethical behavior in any relationship between a business and its constituents, especially customers. intended must be a lot more effort to make sure everyone behaves ethically, according to Cheeseman (2019, p. 720), even if rules are intended to aid both people and businesses. In the case that a company's products cause harm to consumers, the sale of these items might lead to product liability lawsuits. The article examines two court cases that show how companies dealt with product responsibility and the significance of law and ethics: Kosters v. Seven-Up Co. and Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. both reached verdicts. The article will also discuss the ethics of corporate product responsibility, as well as frameworks and ideas like Kantian ethics and ethical fundamentalism. Legal Analysis

William B. Greenman vs. Yuba Power Products, claims that during the year 1955, Billy B. Greenman was presented with a Shopsmith, a combination energy application, as a present for the holidays. Cutting wood, lathe, or drilling all need this instrument. In 1957, some two years later, William B. Greenman paid the blacksmith and used the tools to cut a pedestal out of a massive wood. This piece of wood was easy for him to work with. Slammed into his forehead was a random piece of wood. Twelve and a half months after the purchase, Bill Greenman officially informed the vendor and producer of his allegations of negligence and violation of guarantee. The avalanche of evidence that William B. Greenman may show in court connects the Shopsmith combination power tool's poor design and manufacture to his injuries. There were allegations of manufacture on the part of William B. Greenman, and the firm was subsequently held liable for $65,000 in damages. Both the manufacturer and Williams B. Greenman appealed that portion of the ruling to have it reversed. If the producer is to be believed, William B. Greenman was not entitled to claim for breach of contract under § 1769 of the civil code as he failed to provide enough notice of the infringement. Sharon P. Kosters vs. Seven-Up Company As part of their franchise agreement, Seven- Up has authorized the Brooks Bottling Company to utilize certain Seven-Up bottle, case, and crown designs for their brand. Not only that but "the Seven-Up Company must approve any advertising material used by the bottler" (Kosters v. Seven-Up Co., 595 F. 2d 34, 1979). With the help of her legal representation, Sharon Kosters was able to achieve a $30,000 compensation that included the grocery store, the carton maker, and the bottler. Nonetheless, Seven-up disagreed, saying that the company had authorized the package for purely aesthetic grounds, wanting to ensure that the brand was appropriate. Third parties Sharon Kosters sued included the bottler, the

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

carton maker, and the store operator after her first action sought a portion of the compensation from Seven-Up. Seven-Up maintains that the five interconnected theories of product responsibility developed by the district court—three based on strict duty, one on contract, and one on carelessness—are all incorrect. Juries may find Seven-Up liable for anything—even if there is no "defective" container—because of the "inherently dangerous activity" and "opportunity to change design" instructions. Ethical Analysis Ethical Fundamentalism Devoting one's trust to God boosts self-assurance. It is believed by Cheeseman (2019, p. 722) that people often seek guidance from well-established institutions or groups when they are unsure about what is right or wrong. One case that made extensive use of California Civil Code precedent was Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. "Acceptance of the goods by the buyer shall not discharge the seller from liability in damages or other legal remedy for breach of any promise or warranty in the contract to sell or the sale," according to the Civil Code's Section 1769. To the extent that this paragraph conflicts with any provision of any earlier agreement, this paragraph shall take precedence. According to the decision in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (59 Cal. 2d. 57 1963), purchasers are not held responsible for sellers' actions if they fail to notify them of a broken promise or guarantee within a reasonable period after becoming aware of it. Filing a claim for guaranteed violation is prohibited by conforming to the ethical fundamentalist criterion in § 1769 of the Civil Code. Regarding the Moral Subjects Explored by Kant in His Selected Writings. An essential aspect of Kant's ethical theory is the universal applicability of principles (Cheeseman, pp. 723, 2019). At the heart of

Kantian ethics is the idea that one should be truthful and have the power to change their situation. Both instances' courts moved on by applying the same standards to the question of legality. It will be given priority above all other requests since it is an exception. Companies like this have been held liable in cases where their products hurt consumers, such as Greenman v. Yuba Power Items, Inc. and Kosters v. Seven-Up Co. In the case of Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., Williams B. Greenman was involved. He was hurt while using a faulty combo power tool that was given to him for Christmas. An injury victim named Sharon Kosters filed a lawsuit against Seven-Up Co. in what is formally known as Kosters v. Seven-Up Co. Law vs. Ethics Indeed, not every rule has been codified. However, most laws still originate from moral principles, as stated by Cheeseman in his work (vol. 720). Consumers and businesses alike are still dealing with product liability problems. Anyone doing anything from creating, promoting, or delivering a defective product might face legal ramifications if someone gets wounded using it. If their goods cause injury or death, manufacturers may be subject to legal action under different tort systems. Consistent with this school of thought is the current idea of strict responsibility, which deals with issues like deceit and carelessness. William B. Greenman was successful in suing Yuba Power Products Inc. and being held heavily liable, despite the lack of a particular promise being made. Even if it's unpleasant for them, producers might face legal consequences if consumers can legally enforce the promises they make to them, whether verbally or in writing. One of the primary objectives of strict responsibility, as stated in Greenman v. Yuba Power Goods, Inc. (59 Cal. 2d. 57 1963), is to ensure that corporations, and not defenseless individuals,

are held financially accountable for the harm generated by their goods. All parties involved in the purchase or maintenance of the product are under "strict responsibility" according to Cheeseman (2019, p. 116), even though the firm did not provide the materials. This is supported by Seven- Up's argument in Kosters v. Seven-Up Co., which suggests that any additional grounds for significant tort responsibility would still be applicable. Neither Seven-up nor its suppliers were involved in making this container, and neither company was required to make sure that the franchisee used it. Conclusion Finally, product liability lawsuits often target consumers who have injuries because of using a product. Although to varying degrees, product responsibility was at issue in both Seven- Up Co. and Greenman v. Yuba Power Products Inc. After injuring themselves while using the defendants' products, the plaintiffs decided to sue the two companies. The moral principles of a fundamentalist or Kantian theory might be useful here. Reference

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Cheeseman, H. R. (2019). Business law: Henry R. Cheeseman, Professor Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California . Pearson. Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., [L. A. No. 26976. In Bank. Jan. 24, 1963.] WILLIAM B. GREENMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. YUBA POWER PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant and Appellant; THE HAYSEED, Defendant and Respondent. Kosters v. Seven-Up Co., 595 F. 2d 347 - Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit 1979 Kosters v. Seven- Up Co. , 595 F.2d 347 (6th Cir. 1979)

Related Documents

IDS 100 5-2 Project Draft.docx

Final Healthcare paper - 1 - Submit (1).pdf

Presentation.pptx

MRKT 2016 - Module 2 - Case Study 1 - Heineken and Environmental Scanning.docx

2024-Assignment 2 - Labour Relations Act Websearch.docx

Case Study 2.docx

Week 7 Final Paper bla303.docx

Logistics Plan Report .docx

Final-F21.docx

pestle analysis .docx

BAO NGOC TRAN - FCSPEP.pdf

Project 4.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student Edition

Business

ISBN:9781337407137

Author:Kelly

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...

Business

ISBN:9781337386494

Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana Loewy

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)

Business

ISBN:9780134474021

Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. Steinbart

Publisher:PEARSON

Introduction to Business

Business

ISBN:9781947172548

Author:OpenStax

Publisher:OpenStax College

International Business: Competing in the Global M...

Business

ISBN:9781259929441

Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. Hult

Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education

Bcom

Business

ISBN:9780357026595

Author:LEHMAN, Carol M.

Publisher:Cengage Learning,

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student Edition
Business
ISBN:9781337407137
Author:Kelly
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...
Business
ISBN:9781337386494
Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana Loewy
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)
Business
ISBN:9780134474021
Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. Steinbart
Publisher:PEARSON
Introduction to Business
Business
ISBN:9781947172548
Author:OpenStax
Publisher:OpenStax College
International Business: Competing in the Global M...
Business
ISBN:9781259929441
Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. Hult
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Bcom
Business
ISBN:9780357026595
Author:LEHMAN, Carol M.
Publisher:Cengage Learning,