Asked by Ashton Krause on Jul 19, 2024
Verified
In the case in the text,Branham v.Ford Motor Co. ,the court stated that the plaintiff was required to prove three things at trial for his product liability design defect action.Which of the following is not one of the three requirements?
A) Evidence of a reasonable alternative design
B) The defendant knew the product was dangerous
C) A design flaw in the product
D) How an alterative design would have prevented the product from being unreasonably dangerous
Product Liability
Refers to the legal obligation of sellers or manufacturers to compensate for injury or damage caused by defective or unsafe products.
Design Defect
A flaw in the intended design of a product that makes it unsafe for use or consumption.
Reasonable Alternative Design
A feasible and practical design option that could minimize or eliminate risk or harm, often discussed in the context of product liability.
- Perceive the criteria courts utilize to determine culpability in situations involving negligence and warranty breaches.
Verified Answer
MJ
Michelle JordanJul 22, 2024
Final Answer :
B
Explanation :
The court held that the plaintiff must present evidence of a reasonable alternative design.The plaintiff will be required to point to a design flaw in the product and show how his alternative design would have prevented the product from being unreasonably dangerous.
Learning Objectives
- Perceive the criteria courts utilize to determine culpability in situations involving negligence and warranty breaches.