BLAW 3310 Exam 2 LEE UTA UPDATED
Questions and CORRECT Answers
INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION - CORRECT ANSWER - false representation
has been made knowingly or w/o belief in its truth, recklessly, carelessly whether it be true or
false
INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ADVANTAGE - CORRECT ANSWER - a tort
where there is an intentional and unjustified intervention with a relationship that a party had been
developing with others in an effort to obtain new business or more business
caveat emptor - CORRECT ANSWER - This means let the buyer be aware
privity of contract - CORRECT ANSWER - This refers to the relationship that exists
between contracting parties. This made manufacturers not responsible for their items if they sold
it to a dealer and a dealer sold it to a customer. This is now taken away.
PRODUCT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - the producer's responsibility for any
injury that the business's products may cause.
PROBLEM WITH PRODUCT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - often, the person
who bought product didn't buy from manufacturer (ex. cars at dealership - MacPherson v. Buick
Motor)
CASE: MACPHERSON V. BUICK MOTOR - CORRECT ANSWER - case that deals
with product liability that said consumer can sue the maker of a product directly - wooden spokes
with crack - Buick was charged with NEGLIGENCE because, even though they didn't make the
wheel, they could have inspected it.
CASE: BAXTER V. FORD MOTOR - CORRECT ANSWER - Ford said windshield
would never break. it did, and put Baxter's eye out.
, Interference with contractual relations - CORRECT ANSWER - This is a business tort,
when a wrongdoer intentionally causes another party to break a good contract, the motive does
not matter. The point is that breaking the contract is done to benefit the tortfeasor. This causes
injury to the party who suffers the breach of contract. The party who suffers the breach may sue
both the party who breached the contract for breach and the wrongdoer for the tort of
interference with contract.
CASE: GREENMAN V. YUBA POWER - CORRECT ANSWER - 1st case to deals with
strict liability of manufacturer of a product. Greenman's wife bought him a saw. Saw was
defective - threw board at his head.
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCT DEFECT - CORRECT ANSWER - a product: contains a
manufacturing defect; is defective by design; defective because of inadequate
instructions/warnings
failure to warn - CORRECT ANSWER - consumers of dangers in the use of a product, or
to instruct consumers about proper procedures in using a product, has long been actionable. This
applies where the manufacturer knows of a danger caused by the product's use that cannot be
prevented entirely, but about which users could be warned. For example, lawn mowers now
routinely have warning labels telling users not to try to unclog blocked grass discharge chutes
while the mower is running.
design defect - CORRECT ANSWER - Cases are not concerned with a product that has
been poorly manufactured and causes an injury. Rather, such cases focus on the determination of
whether an injury to users could have been prevented by designing the product differently.
STRICT LIABILITY BASED ON EXPRESS WARRANTY (BAXTER V. FORD MOTOR) -
CORRECT ANSWER - when a product specifically doesn't live up to its warranty, anyone
who handled the product is liable (Baxter v. Ford Motor: Ford has express warranty that says
windshield will never break... it does and puts Baxter's eye out. Baxter successfully sues.)
STATUTORY LIMITS ON LIABILITY: GOVERNMENTS HAVE LAWS THAT TRY TO
LIMIT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - (1)Worker compensation statutes usually
make that program the exclusive remedy for injured workers, unless an intentional tort was
involved.
Questions and CORRECT Answers
INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION - CORRECT ANSWER - false representation
has been made knowingly or w/o belief in its truth, recklessly, carelessly whether it be true or
false
INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ADVANTAGE - CORRECT ANSWER - a tort
where there is an intentional and unjustified intervention with a relationship that a party had been
developing with others in an effort to obtain new business or more business
caveat emptor - CORRECT ANSWER - This means let the buyer be aware
privity of contract - CORRECT ANSWER - This refers to the relationship that exists
between contracting parties. This made manufacturers not responsible for their items if they sold
it to a dealer and a dealer sold it to a customer. This is now taken away.
PRODUCT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - the producer's responsibility for any
injury that the business's products may cause.
PROBLEM WITH PRODUCT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - often, the person
who bought product didn't buy from manufacturer (ex. cars at dealership - MacPherson v. Buick
Motor)
CASE: MACPHERSON V. BUICK MOTOR - CORRECT ANSWER - case that deals
with product liability that said consumer can sue the maker of a product directly - wooden spokes
with crack - Buick was charged with NEGLIGENCE because, even though they didn't make the
wheel, they could have inspected it.
CASE: BAXTER V. FORD MOTOR - CORRECT ANSWER - Ford said windshield
would never break. it did, and put Baxter's eye out.
, Interference with contractual relations - CORRECT ANSWER - This is a business tort,
when a wrongdoer intentionally causes another party to break a good contract, the motive does
not matter. The point is that breaking the contract is done to benefit the tortfeasor. This causes
injury to the party who suffers the breach of contract. The party who suffers the breach may sue
both the party who breached the contract for breach and the wrongdoer for the tort of
interference with contract.
CASE: GREENMAN V. YUBA POWER - CORRECT ANSWER - 1st case to deals with
strict liability of manufacturer of a product. Greenman's wife bought him a saw. Saw was
defective - threw board at his head.
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCT DEFECT - CORRECT ANSWER - a product: contains a
manufacturing defect; is defective by design; defective because of inadequate
instructions/warnings
failure to warn - CORRECT ANSWER - consumers of dangers in the use of a product, or
to instruct consumers about proper procedures in using a product, has long been actionable. This
applies where the manufacturer knows of a danger caused by the product's use that cannot be
prevented entirely, but about which users could be warned. For example, lawn mowers now
routinely have warning labels telling users not to try to unclog blocked grass discharge chutes
while the mower is running.
design defect - CORRECT ANSWER - Cases are not concerned with a product that has
been poorly manufactured and causes an injury. Rather, such cases focus on the determination of
whether an injury to users could have been prevented by designing the product differently.
STRICT LIABILITY BASED ON EXPRESS WARRANTY (BAXTER V. FORD MOTOR) -
CORRECT ANSWER - when a product specifically doesn't live up to its warranty, anyone
who handled the product is liable (Baxter v. Ford Motor: Ford has express warranty that says
windshield will never break... it does and puts Baxter's eye out. Baxter successfully sues.)
STATUTORY LIMITS ON LIABILITY: GOVERNMENTS HAVE LAWS THAT TRY TO
LIMIT LIABILITY - CORRECT ANSWER - (1)Worker compensation statutes usually
make that program the exclusive remedy for injured workers, unless an intentional tort was
involved.
