Exam 2 CHP 7

Question 1

Wrongful acts committed against business entities.

Answer 1

Business Torts

Question 2

Intentional misstatement of an entity that includes scienter, privity between parties, causation, and damages.

Answer 2

Fraudulent misrepresentation

Question 3

What are the elements of fraud?

Answer 3

1. Misstatement of material fact
2. Scienter
3. Seller must know that statement is false
4. Buyer must need provided material information
5. Must be privity between parties
6. Must be causation
7. Must be damages

Question 4

Intent to defraud, the party wanted to mislead the other party and intentionally deceived them.

Answer 4

Scienter

Question 5

A claim that another party wrongfully interfered with the injured business’s contractual relations.

Answer 5

Interference with contractual relations

Question 6

A business attempts to improve its place in the market by interfering with another’s fair attempt to gain new business by use of improper acts.

Answer 6

Interference with prospective advantage

Question 7

A general term that concerns the liability that producers and sellers of goods have to those injured by their products.

Answer 7

Product liability

Question 8

A manufacturer’s assurance that a product will meet certain quality and performance standards.

Answer 8

Warranty

Question 9

A relationship exists between contracting parties.

Answer 9

Privity of contract

Question 10

A woman sued a company over a defective portion of a vehicle she purchased. Excluded privity of contract.

Answer 10

McPherson v. Buick

Question 11

A doctrine that holds manufacturers liable to consumers injured by defective products regardless of whether the manufacturer had been negligent.

Answer 11

Strict liability

Question 12

Helped bring about nationwide acceptance of the strict liability in tort rule.

Answer 12

Restatement 402A

Question 13

Design defect, failure to warn, and manufacturing defect.

Answer 13

Three types of strict liability

Question 14

An injury caused by the design of a product.

Answer 14

Design defect

Question 15

An injury caused by a defect in the product from the manufacturing stage.

Answer 15

Manufacturing defect

Question 16

Failure to instruct consumers about proper procedures in using a product, has long been actionable.

Answer 16

Inadequate warnings

Question 17

A consumer sued a company over their product not providing adequate safety warnings. Consumer lost.

Answer 17

Parish v. Icon

Question 18

A consumer’s husband was hurt by a defective product. The consumer sues the product’s manufacturer over its defective design. Consumer wins.

Answer 18

Greenman case/Strict liability doctrine

Question 19

Defenses in Product Liability suits

Answer 19

1. Assumption of Risk
2. Product Misuse
3. Statutory Limits
4. Bulk-Supplier Doctrine

Question 20

Manufacturers of products made to government specifications may be immune from product liability.

Answer 20

Government contractor liability

Question 21

Involves a risk of serious harm to the person, land, or chattels of another, which cannot be eliminated by the exercise of the utmost care.

Answer 21

Ultrahazardous liability

Question 22

A case between two parties over the negligent building of a reservoir over improperly built coal shafts. The contractor won the case.

Answer 22

Rylands v. Fletcher

Question 23

A suit involving a pharmaceutical company that covered a medicine meant for pregnant women that unfortunately complicated their births, causing birth defects on the babies.

Answer 23

Thalidomide case

Question 24

A case about a hotel not properly instilling security led to a mass shooter killing multiple people and injuring hundreds more. The hotel had to pay out 800 million to the survivors of the incident.

Answer 24

Las Vegas Hotel case

Question 25

A suit about a woman who purchased a coffee from the defendant. When adding sugar to the coffee, the plaintiff spills the coffee into her groin, causing severe burns. The woman sues over how hot the coffee was. The plaintiff wins the case, winning $160,000 in compensatory damages, and $480,000 in punitive damages.

Answer 25

McDonalds case

Question 26

A suit about a company that sold talc powder having to pay out 4.7 billion to women who developed ovarian cancer after using said powder.

Answer 26

J & J case

Question 27

Let the buyer beware, requires that the buyer examine, judge, and test the product for himself.

Answer 27

Caveat emptor

Question 28

When the manufacturer provides performance promises to the consumer so they are part of the contract for sale.

Answer 28

Express warranty

Question 29

Practicing nurses and doctors mess up with a woman’s oxygen machine. The woman losing oxygen for a period of time, losing brain function from loss of oxygen. Family sues doctor and hospital. Wins 20 million.

Answer 29

Malpractice in Dallas