The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases (MindTap Course List)
10th Edition
ISBN: 9781305967304
Author: Frank B. Cross, Roger LeRoy Miller
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 7, Problem 4BCP
Summary Introduction
Case summary:A year after person D bought a brand-new F-350 pickup truck from the company F, it spontaneously caught fire. Although no other property was damaged and nobody got injured, the truck demolished. The person D filed a case against the company F for the recovery of the cost of the truck in the Nebraska state court.
To find: Acceptance of the claim made by person D.
Summary Introduction
Case summary:A year after the person D bought a brand-new F-350 pickup truck from the company F, it spontaneously caught fire. Although no other property was damaged and nobody got injured, the truck demolished. The person D filed a case against the company F for the recovery of the cost of the truck in the Nebraska state court.
To find: Any basis on which the person D can recover damages.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
Negligence CaseWest v. East Tennessee Pioneer Oil Co.In Knox County Tennessee, a convenience store clerk refused to sell Brian Taver beer because he wasalready intoxicated. However, the clerk eventually activated the gas pump and, with the assistance of twoadditional store employees, who helped Taver operate the pump, Taver was able to purchase a small amount ofgas.Taver then drove off, going the wrong way on the highway and without his headlights on. Shortlyafterward, he crashed into an oncoming car, injuring Gary West and Michelle Richardson.West suffered several fractures of his legs, a head injury, and a broken elbow. West works in theconstruction industry. West, who has basic health insurance provided by his employer, was left with over$200,000 in personal debt as a consequence of the accident. Richardson suffered a severe closed-head injury.Richardson is an administrative assistant for the state of Tennessee. Her employer provided betterhealth insurance coverage, so she did not…
A chemical processing company stored toxic waste on its premises. A severe storm caused damaged to the containers storing the waste, which resulted in the spill contaminating nearby pond, which belongs to Sam. The chemical processing company was careful when storing the waste and no allegation of negligence is made. However, Sam claims that the chemical processing company is liable for the pond contamination, even though there is no negligence. Is Sam correct? 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.
Chapter 7 Solutions
The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases (MindTap Course List)
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Brenda Brandt was admitted to Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center (Health Center) to receive treatment for urinary incontinence. During the course of an operation, the doctor surgically implanted a ProteGen Sling (sling) in Brandt. Subsequently, the manufacturer of the sling, Boston Scientific Corporation, issued a recall of the sling because it was causing medical complications in some patients. Brandt suffered serious complications and had the sling surgically removed. Brandt sued Boston Scientific Corporation and Health Center for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability included in Article 2 (Sales) of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Health Center filed a motion with the court to have the case against it dismissed. Health Center argued that it was a provider of services and not a merchant that sold goods, and because the UCC (Sales) applies to the sale of goods, Health Center was not subject to the UCC. Health Center proved that Brandt’s bill was $11,174.50 total charge…arrow_forwardDeborah McCullough bought a new car from Bill Swad Chrysler, Inc. The car was protected by both a limited warranty and an extended warranty. McCullough immediately encountered problems with the automobile’s brakes, transmission, and air conditioning and discovered a number of cosmetic defects as well. She returned the car to Swad for repairs, but Swad did not fix the brakes properly or perform any of the cosmetic work. Moreover, new problems appeared with respect to the car’s steering mechanism. McCullough returned the car twice more for repairs, but on each occasion, old problems persisted and new ones emerged. After the engine abruptly shut off on a short trip away from home and the brakes again failed on a more extensive excursion, McCullough presented Swad with a list of thirty-two of the car’s defects and demanded their correction. When Swad failed to remedy more than a few of the problems, McCullough wrote a letter to Swad calling for rescission of the purchase agreement and a…arrow_forwardBusiness Tort of Negligence Dewayne, a driver for Speedy Delivery Company, leaves the truck's motor running in neutral and carelessly forgets to set the parking brake while making a delivery. The truck rolls and crashes into a nearby gas station pump, igniting a fire that spreads quickly to a construction site a block away. A burned wall collapses onto a crane, which falls on Fazio, a bystander, and injures him. What must Fazio show to recover damages from Speedy Delivery? If you are the attorney for Speedy Delivery what would be your best defense argument? Your paper should be between 500-750 words, with at least two cited external resources. View your assignment rubric. ROLK LOVEarrow_forward
- Warranty and strict liability represent two causes of action, often relied upon by plaintiffs who pursue recovery in a product liability case. Describe the two legal theories by making reference to the elements that need be proven; the obstacles with which a plaintiff may be confronted; the recoveries that be sought; and finally, the nature of the cause of action; hint from what discipline of law does each theory arisearrow_forwardSherman is a delivery person for Ashley Furniture. One day, after delivering a chair he stopped at a fast-food restaurant to get a sandwich at the drive-through window. As he was leaving the parking lot, he accidentally hit the rear of Stan's car. Discuss the possible liability of Ashley Furniture for Sherman's accident. Would there be any difference in the potential liability of Ashley Furniture if Sherman had the accident after driving 30 miles away to visit a friend?arrow_forwardUsing the IRAC model to answer the question. Jim and Jane got married last Sunday. The next day they travelled to Extended Stay Hotel in Miami for their honeymoon. They arrived at the Hotel, checked in and proceeded to their room. At the back of the front door in their room was a notice excluding liability, which read that “ Extended Stay will not be responsible for articles lost or stolen, unless it is logged at the front desk for safe custody.” However, this exclusion clause could only be seen after the door is closed as well as, the actual notice was small and colored in black, with a white background. Regrettably, with all the excitement of their honeymoon, both Jim and Jane did not even notice the exclusion clause at the back of the door. One day when they were out shopping, someone came into their room and stole Jim’s laptop.…arrow_forward
- Artist James Daugherty painted six murals on the walls of the public high school in Stamford, Connecticut. Many years later, the city began to restore its high school. The architect and school officials agreed that the Daugherty murals should be preserved. They arranged for the construction workers to remove the murals to prevent harm. By accident, the workers rolled them up and placed them near the trash dumpsters for disposal. A student found the murals and took them home, and later notified the federal government’s General Services Administration (GSA) of his find. The GSA arranged to transport the murals to an art restorer, named Hiram Hoelzer, for storage and eventual restoration, when funds could be arranged. Over 19 years went by before anyone notified the Stamford School system where the murals were. In the meantime, neither the GSA nor anyone else paid Hoelzer for the storage or restoration. By 1989 the murals were valued at $1.25 million by Sotheby’s, an art auction house.…arrow_forward19) The Elle Corporation manufactures fingernail polish. Suzy buys a container of Elle's fingernail polish, applies it to her nails, and suffers a severe allergic reaction. She sues Elle under the implied warranty of merchantability, The test for determining whether Suzy will recover is whether: A) the nail polish she bought was suitable for the needs of the average consumer. B) the nail polish she bought properly performed its function of coloring one's nails. C) such a reaction in an appreciable number of consumers was reasonably foreseeable. D) the ingredient causing the reaction was foreign to the nail polish or natural to it. nating one model, Bobby noticesarrow_forwardZucker purchased a mobile phone that included LookUP’s software, a database product containing information from 3,000 telephone directories. Every mobile phone sold with the LookUP software was wrapped in plastic shrinkwrap and prominently featured text notifying buyers that an enclosed license restricted use of the LookUP software product. After removing the cellophane cover and opening the mobile phone box, buyers could access the printed LookUP license. Moreover, consumers could not use the LookUP software product without first accepting the license posted on the screen. This license prohibited buyers from using the database commercially. Zucker, a college student, bought a mobile phone with LookUP software and then resold the database’s information on the internet to make some extra money for tuition. LookUP sued Zucker, who argued that the license did not apply to him because he never agreed to it. Zucker claimed the phone he purchased was not wrapped in plastic and was presented…arrow_forward
- Thelma purchased a used truck from Hall that had been manufactured by International Harvester. To work on the truck engine, Thelma had to have the cab of the truck raised. When it was so raised, the cab fell unexpectedly and fatally injured Thelma. Suit was brought for her wrongful death against Hall and International Harvester. The suit was based on theories of negligence, strict tort liability, and breach of warranty. The defense was raised that there was no liability because the sale to Thelma had been made “as is” and the truck was a used truck. Were these defenses valid?arrow_forwardJohn Campbell, an employee of Manhattan Construction Company, claims to have injured his back as a result of a fall while repairing the roof at one of the Eastview apartment buildings. He filed a lawsuit against Doug Reynolds, the owner of Eastview Apartments, asking for damages of $1,500,000. John claims that the roof had rotten sections and that his fall could have been prevented if Mr. Reynolds had told Manhattan Construction about the problem. Mr. Reynolds notified his insurance company, Allied Insurance, of the lawsuit. Allied must defend Mr. Reynolds and decide what action to take regarding the lawsuit.Some depositions and a series of discussions took place between both sides. As a result, John Campbell offered to accept a settlement of $750,000. Thus, one option is for Allied to pay John $750,000 to settle the claim. Allied is also considering making John a counteroffer of $400,000 in the hope that he will accept a lesser amount to avoid the time and cost of going to trial.…arrow_forwardIn Snyder V. Phelps, the Supreme Court held the first amendment shields Westboro from any tort liability arising from the picketing at the funeral of Mr. Snyder's son. True Falsearrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student EditionBusinessISBN:9781337407137Author:KellyPublisher:Cengage Learning
Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...BusinessISBN:9781337386494Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana LoewyPublisher:Cengage Learning
Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)BusinessISBN:9780134474021Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. SteinbartPublisher:PEARSON
International Business: Competing in the Global M...BusinessISBN:9781259929441Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. HultPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
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
International Business: Competing in the Global M...
Business
ISBN:9781259929441
Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. Hult
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education