How is the theory of negligence in product liability different in common law states compared to countries that don't follow common law?
What will be an ideal response?
The common law negligence theory, as it relates to products liability, is essentially the same in both types of laws; however, two doctrines make it somewhat easier for a common law claimant to meet the proof requirements. One is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. This excuses an injured claimant who can show that a product was defective when it left the hands of the defendant from having to prove that the defendant caused the defect. The other doctrine is negligence per se. This excuses a claimant from showing that the defendant breached a duty of care in those cases where the defendant violated a statutory manufacturing or disclosure requirement.
You might also like to view...
In the FABV approach, if the salesperson is discussing the monetary terms associated with the offering, s/he is talking about ________
A) features B) advantages C) benefits D) value E) macroenvironment
Because information rules must be checked out before a decision can be made, they lengthen the time required to analyze choices.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
What is the name given to the process by which an administrative agency promulgates statements designed to implement, interpret, or process law or policy?
A) Rulemaking B) Lobbying C) Adjudication D) Enforcement
If you wish to be cremated when you die, this request should be included in a
A) simple will. B) letter of last instruction. C) codicil. D) probate.