Bundle: The Legal Environment Of Business: Text And Cases, 10th + Mindtap Business Law, 1 Term (6 Months) Printed Access Card
10th Edition
ISBN: 9781337374835
Author: CROSS
Publisher: CENGAGE L
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 7, Problem 6BCP
Summary Introduction
Case summary: The person C got distracted by a texting system in the cab of his tractor-trailer truck while driving through interstate. This resulted in the smashing of several vehicles in front of him and injuring the persons B, M, and others. A lawsuit was filed against the maker of the texting system G by the injured motorists.
To find: Cause of the accident in the above-case and the appropriate product design that must not distract the drivers.
Summary Introduction
Case summary: The person C got distracted by a texting system in the cab of his tractor-trailer truck while driving through interstate. This resulted in the smashing of several vehicles in front of him and injuring the persons B, M, and others. A lawsuit was filed against the maker of the texting system G by the injured motorists.
To Explain: The responsibility of the manufacturer to design a product that must not distract drivers.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
The National Safety Council estimates that one quarter of all automobile and truck accidents involve cell phone use or texting. In fatality and injury vehicle accidents, plaintiffs’ attorneys subpoena cell phone records, which often form the basis of compelling liability cases against driver-employees and their employers via vicarious liability. While balancing the privacy rights of the employee, with the business practice of the employer, is it appropriate to ban all cell phone usage while driving on company business. Please fully discuss. HINT: Address the Vicarious Liability & Privacy Rights Issues. Please use the IRAC format Issue: Call of the QuestionRule: Rule of Law to be applied to properly answer the questionAnalysis: Applying the rule of law to the facts of the problem presentedConclusion: Answer to the Issue
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…
Answer please
Chapter 7 Solutions
Bundle: The Legal Environment Of Business: Text And Cases, 10th + Mindtap Business Law, 1 Term (6 Months) Printed Access Card
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Business 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_forward27. Vicarious liability refers to a situation where: the employer is held legally responsible for actions of its employees the employer serves alcohol at company-sponsored events the onus is on the employer to prove it was not negligent none of the abovearrow_forward(a) Under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), what is misleading and deceptive conduct and how does it differ from puffery? (b) Provide two real-world examples of puffery that wouldn't be a breach of ACL:arrow_forward
- Liability of a manufacturer, seller, or supplier to a buyer or other third party for injuries sustained because of a defect in a product is known as? A crime. Tort per se. An intentional tort. Products liability.arrow_forwardNegligence 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…arrow_forwardLouisa, who is not a real estate license holder, owns three single-family residences, which she rents out. (She does not occupy any of the residences). Does she have to abide by the Fair Housing Act when selecting tenants? Louisa is exempt from the Fair Housing Act, although she may not use discriminatory advertising. Louisa is exempt from the Fair Housing Act under the Mrs. Murphy exemption. Louisa is not exempt from the Fair Housing Act. Louisa is not exempt under the Fair Housing Act, but she is exemptunder the Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act.arrow_forward
- S insured his appliance store under an owner, landlords, and tenant’s policy that included products liability coverage. While he was demonstrating a microwave oven the door came open and injured a customer. Which of the following would protect S? The oven manufacture’s products liability policy The premises-operation section on S’s policy The products Liability section on S’s policy The incidental contracts section of S’s policyarrow_forward5-3 PROXIMATE CAUSE. Galen Stoller was killed at a railroad crossing when a train hit his car. The crossing was marked with a stop sign and a railroad-crossing symbol. The sign was not obstructed by vegetation, but there were no flashing lights. Galen’s parents filed a suit against Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad Corp. The plaintiffs accused the defendant of negligence in the design and maintenance of the crossing. The defendant argued that Galen had not stopped at the stop sign. Was the railroad negligent? What was the proximate cause of the accident? Discuss. [Henderson v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., __ F.3d __ (10th Cir. 2011)] (See Negligence.)arrow_forwardAllen, a teacher, copied pages from a published novel for study by the members of his literature class. Has she infringed the copyright?arrow_forward
- JimmyCorps places several Facebook ads claiming that his magic tonic protects consumers from coronavirus. Harvey places an order for 50 gallons of the magic tonic to protect himself and his family. Meanwhile, the New York Attorney General commences prosecution of JimmyCorps for fraud—his magic tonic is simply a gallon of bleach, and consumers who have purchased it have become gravely ill or died. Still, JimmyCorps sues Harvey when Harvey refuses to pay for the 50 gallons of tonic he ordered. Can a judge force Harvey to pay JimmyCorps? Why or why not? Note:- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism. Answer completely. You will get up vote for sure.arrow_forwardA 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.arrow_forward"Warranties.Harold Moore bought a barrel-racing horse named Clear Boggy for $100,000 for his daugh-ter. The seller was Betty Roper, who appraises barrel-racing horses. (Barrel racing is a rodeo event in which a horse and rider attempt to complete a cloverleaf pattern around preset barrels in the fastest time.) Clear Boggy was promoted for sale as a competitive barrel-racing horse. On inquiry, Roper repre-sented that Clear Boggy did not have any performance issues or medical problems, and that the only medications the horse had been given were hock injections, a common treatment.Shortly after the purchase, Clear Boggy began exhibiting significant performance problems, including nervousness, unwillingness to practice, and stalling during runs. Roper then disclosed that the horse had been given shoulder injec-tions prior to the sale and had previously stalled in competi-tion. Moore took the horse to a veterinarian and discovered that it suffered from arthritis, impinged vertebrae,…arrow_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