For his Superbowl Sunday party, Jack bought, among other things, some Francisco mustard. Even before the game began, one of the guests, Fred, made himself a sandwich using that mustard. When Fred saw another guest, Tad, making a sandwich with the mustard, Fred warned him that the sandwich did not taste right and that he (Fred) didn't feel too well. Tad ate everything else on his plate, but left the sandwich. Fred became quite ill and had to go to the hospital. It was determined that the mustard was contaminated when it was made. Jack had bought the mustard just an hour before game time from Big Store, which had bought it from DB Distributors Ltd., which had bought it from the manufacturer New Foods Ltd. On these facts, which of the following is true?

A) Since Fred did not buy the mustard himself, he must suffer his loss; i.e., he cannot sue anyone.
B) Fred could successfully sue Jack for negligence because Jack bought the mustard.
C) Tad could successfully sue Jack for negligence.
D) Fred could successfully sue the distributor for negligence because the distributor delivered the case of mustard to Big Store.
E) Fred could successfully sue the manufacturer New Foods Ltd. for negligence but could not successfully sue Big Store for negligence.

Question

Mackenzie Brown · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : E, Explanation :  Fred could successfully sue the manufacturer, New Foods Ltd., for negligence because the mustard was contaminated during its production. The liability for a defective product typically lies with the manufacturer rather than the retailer (Big Store) unless the retailer knew or should have known about the defect. In this case, there's no indication that Big Store was aware of the contamination, making it unlikely for Fred to successfully sue Big Store for negligence.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions