BioChem Corporation, ChemCo Company, and DexLabs Inc. make and distribute toxic chemicals. In a product-liability suit against all of these parties, the court is most likely to impose market-share liability if it cannot be proved which of the parties

ClearCall Corporation makes phones, which are sold to consumers by DefDeals stores. Erna files a product liability suit against ClearCall, alleging a design defect. In deciding whether to hold ClearCall liable, the court may consider

Fine Motor Company buys gas pedals and other parts from General Mechanix, Inc., and puts them in its vehicles without changing their composition. If the pedals or other parts are defective, strictly liable for any damage caused by the defects are

Good Cookin’ Products Company makes heat convection ovens. Heidi discovers that her Good Cookin’ oven is defective and sues the maker for product liability based on strict liability. To win, Heidi must show that she

Lipstik, Inc. makes cosmetics. Lipstik intentionally mislabels its packaged products to conceal a defect. Trusting and relying on the mislabeling, Mikayla buys a Lipstik product and suffers an injury. Lipstik is most likely liable for

MedBeat Inc., makes medical devices, including heart pacemakers. Nina, a heart patient, files a product liability suit against MedBeat, alleging a warning defect with respect to its pacemaker. In deciding whether to hold MedBeat liable, the court may consider whether there is a foreseeable risk of harm posed by the pacemaker and

Roadbuilders, Inc., uses dynamite in its operations. Sky-Hi Fireworx, Inc., stores explosives in its warehouses. Most likely liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any injury caused by an abnormally dangerous activity will be

Sea & Surf Corporation makes sailboards, which are bought and distributed by Tropical Marketing Company to UV Sports Stores, Inc., which sells them to consumers. Wen is injured while using a Sea & Surf board that he bought from UV Sports. In a product liability suit based on strict liability, Wen may recover from

Soda Bubbles Corporation makes and sells soft drinks. Talia buys and drinks a Soda Bubbles beverage, which proves defective and injures her. One justification for holding Soda Bubbles strictly liable for the harm caused to Talia by its defective product is that

Stan, an air-conditioning and heating technician, files a suit against Temp-Set Corporation, alleging that its thermostats are unreasonably dangerous due to the possibility of electrical shock. Temp-Set’s best defense is most likely

SurgeStop Company makes electrical cords and other connectors for electronic devices. Rollo files a product liability suit against SurgeStop, alleging a warning defect. In deciding whether to hold SurgeStop liable, the court may consider

The brakes on a train owned by Rolling Stock Railway Inc. malfunction. The train rolls towards maintenance workers on the tracks. Everyone gets out of the way except Sid, who wants to show off. The train hits Sid, who sues Train Components, Inc., the brakes’ manufacturer. Train Components can raise the defense of

A manufacturing defect is a departure from a product unit’s design specifications that results in products that are physically flawed.

An injured party may sue only the manufacturer of defective products that are subject to comprehensive federal regulatory schemes.

Because many products cannot be made entirely safe for all uses, sellers or lessors are liable only for products that are unreasonably dangerous.

Generally, a seller must warn those who purchase its product of the harm that can result from the foreseeable misuse of the product.

Generally, the strict liability of manufactures and other sellers does not extend to injured bystanders.

Manufacturers must use due care in inspecting and testing any purchased components used in a product.

Manufacturers must use due care in selecting the materials to be used in a product.

Misrepresentation in an ad is enough to show an intent to induce the reliance of anyone who may use the product.

Statutes of repose places outer times limit on product liability actions.

The doctrine of strict liability can be applied to sellers of goods, including manufacturers, but not distributors.

The types of product defects that have traditionally been recognized in product liability law include manufacturing defects.

There is a duty to warn about risks that are obvious or commonly known.

To successfully assert a design defect, a plaintiff has to show that no reasonable alternative design was available.