Two real estate agents, pressed for time, stopped at the bakery for some muffins that would suffice as lunch. John bought the muffins and gave one to Mary. They both began to eat the muffins as they hurried to the car. When Mary looked at the muffin she had just bitten, she saw that the raisins had little worms in them. John's muffins were the same-with little worms. Based on these facts, which of the following possibilities is true? (Read each independently from the others.)

A) Since Mary did not buy the muffins, she could not sue in contract, but if she were injured, she could sue in tort.
B) Even if Mary was not injured by eating the worms, she could sue the baker of the muffins for nuisance.
C) If Mary sued the baker of the muffins or the packer of the raisins, she would have to prove only one thing to win her case-that there were worms in the muffin.
D) Mary has a cause of action against the baker of the muffins only if she can prove that the baker used bad raisins on purpose.
E) Mary can do nothing since she did not purchase the muffins.

Question

Zybrea Knight · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : A, Explanation :  Mary, not being the purchaser, might not have a direct contract claim against the bakery, but if she suffered harm from the muffins, she could potentially sue in tort, such as for negligence or product liability.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions