The plaintiff RM’s son died by swallowing a toy block made by the defendant company P on which no warning was issued . The plaintiff filed a suit of negligence against the defendant. The defendant applied for summary judgement contending that the hazard was foreseeable. To Find : the request for summary judgement by the defendant should be accepted .

Question

A gasoline-powered lawn mower that had been used earlier to cut grass was left unattended next to a water heater that had been manufactured by Sears. Expert testimony was presented to demonstrate that vapors from the mower’s gas tank accumulated under the water heater and resulted in an explosion. Three-year-old Shawn Toups was injured as a result. Evidence was also presented negating any claim that Shawn had been handling the gasoline can located nearby or the lawn mower. He was not burned on the soles of his feet or the palms of his hands, and, similarly, the gas can remained in an upright position even after the explosion. Is Sears liable to the Toups in strict product liability? Explain.

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 3, Problem 3RE

Summary Introduction

Case summary: The plaintiff RM’s son died by swallowing a toy block made by the defendant company P on which no warning was issued . The plaintiff filed a suit of negligence against the defendant. The defendant applied for summary judgement contending that the hazard was foreseeable.

To Find: the request for summary judgement by the defendant should be accepted.

Expert Solution & Answer

Trending nowThis is a popular solution!

See solution

Check out sample textbook solution

Students have asked these similar questions

A gasoline-powered lawn mower that had been used earlier to cut grass was left unattended next to a water heater that had been manufactured by Sears. Expert testimony was presented to demonstrate that vapors from the mower’s gas tank accumulated under the water heater and resulted in an explosion. Three-year-old Shawn Toups was injured as a result. Evidence was also presented negating any claim that Shawn had been handling the gasoline can located nearby or the lawn mower. He was not burned on the soles of his feet or the palms of his hands, and, similarly, the gas can remained in an upright position even after the explosion. Is Sears liable to the Toups in strict product liability? Explain.

Dr Lai went to SUPERSAVE supermarket to buy his groceries: he slipped and fell on a puddle of water on one of the aisles. The puddle has been caused by a leaking refrigerator inside the supermarket. The supermarket had a duty to keep the premises safe for its customers, but it had failed to fix the leak. However the supermarket did put up a warning sign near the puddle to alert its customer to beware of its slippery floor. Dr Lai suffered a broken arm from the result of the fall. Analyse the situation and determine wether the supermarket is liable for Dr Lai's injury. Advise wether Dr Lai has the rights to access damages with the supermarket. Include case laws and examples, if relevant.

At Whirlpool’s manufacturing plant in Ohio, overhead conveyors transported household appliance components throughout the plant. A wire mesh screen was positioned below the conveyors to catch falling components and debris. Maintenance employees frequently had to stand on the screens to clean them. Whirlpool began installing heavier wire because several employees had fallen partly through the old screens, and one had fallen completely through to the plant floor. At this time, the company warned workers to walk only on the frames beneath the wire but not on the wire itself. Before the heavier wire had been completely installed, a worker fell to his death through the old screen. A short time after this incident, Deemer and Cornwell, two plant employees, met with the plant safety director to discuss the mesh, to voice their concerns, and to obtain the name, address, and telephone number of the local Occupational Safety and Health Administration representative. The next day, the two…