Question 1

Describe the two approaches taken by courts in negligent failure-to-warn cases involving drugs and cosmetics causing adverse reactions in regard to consumers who would not be considered sophisticated users.

Accepted Answer

Many courts find that there is no duty t...

Question 2

"Contraceptive Injuries." Drug company ABC Drugs came out with a new birth control pill guaranteed to prevent pregnancy for one year after the consumption of one pill. The FDA approved warnings of the drug's side effects including nausea and headache to be provided with the pill. After it was initially put on the market, the company became aware of some risks of dizziness from taking the drug. The company, however, did not warn of that risk because the company was concerned that individuals might not buy the pill, and federal law did not specifically require a warning regarding dizziness. Belinda thought the pill was a great idea and obtained a prescription for it at a date after the company became aware of the issues involving dizziness. She took one and felt fine for a few days. Then, however, she began feeling dizzy. Her dizziness caused her to fall breaking her leg on some steps. She later discovered that the birth control pill likely made her dizzy. Belinda decided to sue under a state law claim for failure to warn, however, she waited a number of years before bringing her action. The drug company claimed that it had no duty to list dizziness as a risk because its warning complied with all FDA requirements. The drug company also claimed that the time in which it could be sued had expired both because Belinda waited too long after she was injured and also too long from the date of product purchase.
-What is the most likely result regarding the company's position that it had no duty to warn of the risk of dizziness because it complied with FDA requirements?

Accepted Answer

A)   That the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDC
A)   establishes both a floor and a ceiling for drug regulation and that no additional warning requirements regarding dizziness could be imposed.
B)   That absent clear evidence that the FDA would not have approved a change in the warning to include dizziness, a state law cause of action based on failure to warn would be allowed.
C)   That no warning regarding dizziness could be required in addition to FDA approved warnings because dizziness is not a serious condition causing a "black box" type of warning involving risk of serious injury death.
D)   That a state law cause of action would be allowed to go forward only upon the submission of clear evidence that a regulatory agency of the state had requested that the warning label be revised to warn of dizziness.
E)   That while the plaintiff could go forward with a federal claim in relation to the lack of a warning regarding dizziness, a state law cause of action would be barred because of the company's compliance with FDA regulations.F) None of the above
G) C) and D) B

Question 3

Which of the following must a plaintiff generally show in order to recover in a product liability lawsuit?

Accepted Answer

A)   Only that the product is defective.
B)   That the defect should have been discovered and fixed prior to sale.
C)   That the defendant was negligent.
D)   That the product is defective and also that the defect existed when the product left the defendant's control.
E)   That the product is defective, that the defect existed when the product left the defendant's control, and also that the defendant was negligent.F) A) and D)
G) A) and E)

Question 4

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 5

Japanese law fails to recognize fault of the part of the consumer in product liability cases, and manufacturers must bear the full burden when a product is found to be defective.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 6

The lack of a feasible way to make a safer product as a matter of law prevents liability based upon an alleged defective product.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 7

In most states, what must a plaintiff prove to succeed in a strict-liability action alleging a defective product?

Accepted Answer

The plaintiff must prove (1) that the pr...

Question 8

List the seven factors set forth in the text from the Sperry-New Holland v. Prestage case, involving injuries caused by a combine, that a trial court may find helpful when balancing a product's utility against the risk the product creates.

Accepted Answer

The factors are as follows:
1. The usefulness and desirability of the product-its utility to the user and to the public as a whole.
2. The safety aspects of the product-the likelihood that it will cause injury and the probable seriousness of the injury.
3. The availability of a substitute product that would meet the same need and not be as unsafe.
4. The manufacturer's ability to eliminate the unsafe character of the product without impairing its usefulness or making it too expensive to maintain its utility.
5. The user's ability to avoid danger by the exercise of care in the use of the product.
6. The user's anticipated awareness of the dangers inherent in the product and their avoidability, because of general public knowledge of the obvious condition of the product or of the existence of suitable warnings or instructions.
7. The feasibility, on the part of the manufacturer, of spreading the loss by setting the price of the product or carrying liability insurance.

Question 9

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Accepted Answer

A)   That if the plaintiff, applying the knowledge of an ordinary consumer, sees a danger and can appreciate that danger, then he cannot recover for any injury resulting from that appreciated danger.
B)   That a plaintiff must show that a retailer failed to do a proper risk-utility analysis before the plaintiff can recover against the retailer.
C)   That a plaintiff must show that a manufacturer failed to do a proper risk-utility analysis before the plaintiff can recover against the manufacturer.
D)   That a product is unreasonably dangerous if a reasonable person would conclude that the danger-in-fact, whether foreseeable or not, outweighs the utility of product.
E)   That a reasonable person must conclude that the use-in-fact of a product outweighs the risk-utility of the product.F) None of the above
G) B) and E)

Question 10

Paul was very excited about his first new vehicle purchase. He borrowed funds from his bank with which to purchase the car. Unfortunately, just a few days after he purchased the vehicle, the pistons in the engine overheated causing the engine to seize rendering the vehicle unusable. No one was injured, but Paul is very upset about his vehicle and plans to sue based on strict liability under the theory set forth by Section 402A of the Restatement (Second)  of Torts. Which of the following is the most likely resolution of his claim?

Accepted Answer

A)   He will be allowed to proceed because the vehicle was in a defective condition.
B)   He will be allowed to proceed only if he can establish that he did appropriate research prior to purchasing the vehicle and had no reason to know that it was likely to be defective.
C)   He will be allowed to proceed so long as he is up-to-date on his loan payments.
D)   He will not be allowed to proceed because there is no recovery under a strict liability theory for solely economic damages.
E)   He will not be allowed to proceed because the only avenue for this type of claim is through a negligence action.F) B) and E)
G) D) and E)

Question 11

Under the market share theory, a plaintiff may be able to recover in a products liability action even if the plaintiff cannot trace the harmful product to a particular manufacturer.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 12

Which of the following is a defense used by a defendant to demonstrate that his alleged negligent behavior was reasonable, given the available scientific knowledge existing at the time the product was sold or produced?

Accepted Answer

A)   Assumption of the risk.
B)   Scientific knowledge doctrine.
C)   State-of-the-art defense.
D)   Reasonable behavior defense.
E)   Reasonable manufacturer defense.F) B) and C)
G) All of the above

Question 13

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Accepted Answer

A)   Breach of warranty.
B)   Negligence.
C)   Strict liability in tort.
D)   Failure to warn.
E)   Failure to warn and breach of warranty.F) B) and C)
G) A) and E)

Question 14

What four considerations did the U.S. Supreme Court identify in the case of Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical for relevant and reliable expert opinions?

Accepted Answer

The court identified the following facto...

Question 15

"Contraceptive Injuries." Drug company ABC Drugs came out with a new birth control pill guaranteed to prevent pregnancy for one year after the consumption of one pill. The FDA approved warnings of the drug's side effects including nausea and headache to be provided with the pill. After it was initially put on the market, the company became aware of some risks of dizziness from taking the drug. The company, however, did not warn of that risk because the company was concerned that individuals might not buy the pill, and federal law did not specifically require a warning regarding dizziness. Belinda thought the pill was a great idea and obtained a prescription for it at a date after the company became aware of the issues involving dizziness. She took one and felt fine for a few days. Then, however, she began feeling dizzy. Her dizziness caused her to fall breaking her leg on some steps. She later discovered that the birth control pill likely made her dizzy. Belinda decided to sue under a state law claim for failure to warn, however, she waited a number of years before bringing her action. The drug company claimed that it had no duty to list dizziness as a risk because its warning complied with all FDA requirements. The drug company also claimed that the time in which it could be sued had expired both because Belinda waited too long after she was injured and also too long from the date of product purchase.
-The defense that Belinda waited too long after the product was purchased in which to sue is a defense based upon which of the following?

Accepted Answer

A)   The statute of limitations.
B)   The statute of repose.
C)   The statute of perpetuity.
D)   The statute of time.
E)   The statute of dates.F) C) and D)
G) D) and E) B

Question 16

What was the result at the Supreme Court level in Wyeth v. Levine, the case in the text in which the defending drug company took the position that the plaintiff's jury verdict on her state law claim alleging that the defendant improperly labeled a drug was preempted by federal law and should be overturned?

Accepted Answer

A)   That the case should be dismissed because the defendant could not be subjected to both federal and state law.
B)   That the case should be dismissed because it was impossible for the defendant to comply with both state and federal law.
C)   That the case should be dismissed because complying with state law would obstruct the purposes and objectives of federal drug labeling regulation.
D)   That the jury verdict would be upheld because the defendant could have complied with its state and federal law obligations.
E)   That the jury verdict would be upheld because Wyeth failed to submit evidence that the plaintiff was guilty of comparative negligence.F) A) and B)
G) All of the above

Question 17

Which of the following defenses is an argument that harm was caused not by the defendant's negligence but by the plaintiff's failure to properly use the product?

Accepted Answer

A)   Assumption of the risk.
B)   Product misuse.
C)   Pure comparative fault.
D)   Last-clear-chance.
E)   Misapplication.F) A) and B)
G) B) and C)

Question 18

Which of the following do courts often consider in determining whether a manufacturer was negligent in failing to warn?

Accepted Answer

A)   The likelihood of the injury only.
B)   The seriousness of the injury only.
C)   The ease of warning only.
D)   The likelihood of the injury and the seriousness of the injury but not the ease of warning.
E)   The likelihood of the injury, the seriousness of the injury, and the ease of warning.F) B) and D)
G) A) and B)

Question 19

What was the ruling of the court in the case of Welge v. Planters Lifesavers Co., the case in which the plaintiff injured his hand when a jar containing peanuts broke?

Accepted Answer

A)   That the case would be dismissed because the plaintiff could not establish that the jar was maintained in a pristine condition after its purchase.
B)   That the plaintiff was unable to recover because negligence in manufacture of the jar could not be established.
C)   That the plaintiff was unable to recover because he was not the actual purchaser of the jar of peanuts.
D)   That the plaintiff would be allowed to proceed because negligence was established.
E)   That the plaintiff would be allowed to proceed with the lawsuit because of a lack of evidence that the jar had been damaged after its purchase.F) A) and B)
G) B) and D)

Question 20

Which of the following is a reference to being a party to a contract?

Accepted Answer

A)   Being in privity of contract.
B)   Being in association with contract.
C)   Being in connect to contract.
D)   Being in affiliation with contract.
E)   Being connected by contract.F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Exam 10: Product Liability

Describe the two approaches taken by courts in negligent failure-to-warn cases involving drugs and cosmetics causing adverse reactions in regard to consumers who would not be considered sophisticated users.

Correct Answer
verified
Many courts find that there is no duty t...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified
B

Which of the following must a plaintiff generally show in order to recover in a product liability lawsuit?

Correct Answer
verified

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Correct Answer
verified

Japanese law fails to recognize fault of the part of the consumer in product liability cases, and manufacturers must bear the full burden when a product is found to be defective.

Correct Answer
verified

The lack of a feasible way to make a safer product as a matter of law prevents liability based upon an alleged defective product.

Correct Answer
verified

In most states, what must a plaintiff prove to succeed in a strict-liability action alleging a defective product?

Correct Answer
verified
The plaintiff must prove (1) that the pr...
View Answer

List the seven factors set forth in the text from the Sperry-New Holland v. Prestage case, involving injuries caused by a combine, that a trial court may find helpful when balancing a product's utility against the risk the product creates.

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Under the market share theory, a plaintiff may be able to recover in a products liability action even if the plaintiff cannot trace the harmful product to a particular manufacturer.

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following is a defense used by a defendant to demonstrate that his alleged negligent behavior was reasonable, given the available scientific knowledge existing at the time the product was sold or produced?

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Correct Answer
verified

What four considerations did the U.S. Supreme Court identify in the case of Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical for relevant and reliable expert opinions?

Correct Answer
verified
The court identified the following facto...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified
B

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following defenses is an argument that harm was caused not by the defendant's negligence but by the plaintiff's failure to properly use the product?

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following do courts often consider in determining whether a manufacturer was negligent in failing to warn?

Correct Answer
verified

What was the ruling of the court in the case of Welge v. Planters Lifesavers Co., the case in which the plaintiff injured his hand when a jar containing peanuts broke?

Correct Answer
verified

Which of the following is a reference to being a party to a contract?

Correct Answer
verified

Exam 10: Product Liability

Describe the two approaches taken by courts in negligent failure-to-warn cases involving drugs and cosmetics causing adverse reactions in regard to consumers who would not be considered sophisticated users.

Correct AnswerverifiedMany courts find that there is no duty t...View AnswerShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedB

Which of the following must a plaintiff generally show in order to recover in a product liability lawsuit?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

No duty to warn exists for dangers arising from either unforeseeable misuses of the product or from obvious dangers.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Japanese law fails to recognize fault of the part of the consumer in product liability cases, and manufacturers must bear the full burden when a product is found to be defective.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

The lack of a feasible way to make a safer product as a matter of law prevents liability based upon an alleged defective product.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

In most states, what must a plaintiff prove to succeed in a strict-liability action alleging a defective product?

Correct AnswerverifiedThe plaintiff must prove (1) that the pr...View AnswerShow Answer

List the seven factors set forth in the text from the Sperry-New Holland v. Prestage case, involving injuries caused by a combine, that a trial court may find helpful when balancing a product's utility against the risk the product creates.

As recognized by the court in Sperry-New Holland v. John Paul Prestage and Pam Prestage, which of the following is true under the risk-utility analysis of product liability?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Under the market share theory, a plaintiff may be able to recover in a products liability action even if the plaintiff cannot trace the harmful product to a particular manufacturer.

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following is a defense used by a defendant to demonstrate that his alleged negligent behavior was reasonable, given the available scientific knowledge existing at the time the product was sold or produced?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following causes of action stem from contract theory?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

What four considerations did the U.S. Supreme Court identify in the case of Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical for relevant and reliable expert opinions?

Correct AnswerverifiedThe court identified the following facto...View AnswerShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedB

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following defenses is an argument that harm was caused not by the defendant's negligence but by the plaintiff's failure to properly use the product?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following do courts often consider in determining whether a manufacturer was negligent in failing to warn?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

What was the ruling of the court in the case of Welge v. Planters Lifesavers Co., the case in which the plaintiff injured his hand when a jar containing peanuts broke?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Which of the following is a reference to being a party to a contract?

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct Answer
verified
Many courts find that there is no duty t...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified
B

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
The plaintiff must prove (1) that the pr...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified
The court identified the following facto...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified
B

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified