1.) A pharmaceutical company produces a drug to control blood pressure, but it's taken off the market after a number of consumers suffer strokes that some believe are linked to the medication.

Is the pharmaceutical company liable for negligence in the case of a lawsuit?

• a.)No, because no one forced consumers to use the medication.
• b.)No, because drug companies do not have a duty of care to consumers.
• c.)Yes, because consumers had legally recognizable injuries.
• d.)Yes, but only if causation can be established.

2.) A pedestrian walks into a crosswalk and is hit by a bicyclist and injured. The pedestrian sues the bicyclist for negligence.

Assuming it is true, which of the following would represent at least a partial defense against the negligence claim?

• a.)The pedestrian had headphones on, was busily engaged in texting, and did not look up before entering the crosswalk.
• b.)The pedestrian sees many bicyclists on the road every day, and assumed the risk of walking anyway.
• c.)The bicyclist was riding to the scene of another accident in order to provide first aid.
• d.)The pedestrian had been involved in other crashes with bicyclists in the past.

3.) A mother with a sick child accidentally gives her child a fever reducer that is meant for adults, rather than a fever reducer meant for children, because the packaging of each is very similar. The child ends up in the hospital due to an overdose.

To successfully sue the pharmaceutical company for strict liability, what would the mother need to prove?

• a.)That mixing up the two medications as a result of their similar packaging was a foreseeable customer misuse
• b.)Nothing, because producing and selling medications is an ultrahazardous activity
• c.)There is no way for strict liability to apply, because overdosing on medication is a commonly known danger.
• d.)That the adult medicine the mother used was part of a batch that turned out defective

4.) Select the statement that is true of current products liability law.

• a.)It essentially functions the same as 19th century consumer law.
• b.)It arose as a result of consumer products becoming easier to understand and operate.
• c.)As a general rule, it holds consumers responsible to protect themselves against both obvious and hidden defects.
• d.)It developed as the processes of production and consumption were increasingly separated.

5.) A 55-year-old woman begins a prescription medication for heart disease, and accidentally overdoses because the medication interacts with a common, over the counter drug the woman also takes on a regular basis. When the woman was given her prescription, it came with a federally-mandated 10 - page list of instructions and warnings, which included a warning not to mix the prescription medication with the over-the-counter drug. The woman sues the prescription drug maker for negligence.

How strong is the negligence case against the product manufacturer?

• a.)Weak, because the manufacturer can argue that the woman had contributory negligence that contributed to the damages.
• b.)Weak, because the manufacturer included a warning aboutthe potential danger of mixing the drugs.
• c.)Strong, because the woman had privity of contract with the manufacturer.
• d.)Strong, because the prescription drug has a defective design that makes it unsafe, since it interacts with other drugs.

6.) A manufacturer of an electrically operated muscle relaxer that sends pulses of electrical current to the muscles sold this machine through Great Buy, a local retail distributor. Sherry purchased one of these machines but did not read the instruction booklet before her first use. The instruction booklet had appropriate warnings about the danger of having the intensity control up too high and counseled users to start out with the intensity on the lowest setting. Unfortunately, Sherry started the machine with the intensity turned up to its highest setting, causing violent convulsions of her arms and shoulders. Sherry suffered consequent injuries to her shoulder joints from the incident.

How strong of a case does Sherry have against the manufacturer for strict product liability?

• a.)Weak, because it will be difficult for Sherry to prove that the manufacturer engaged in negligent behavior.
• b.)Weak, because Sherry neglected to read the instruction booklet that would have warned her against using the machine with the intensity up too high.
• c.)Strong, because the machine clearly arrived in a defective condition if it was capable of injuring Sherry in such a manner.
• d.)Strong, because Great Buy is engaged in the business of selling and is therefore subject to Section 402A of the Restatement of Torts (Second).

7.) Jose sued an auto manufacturer exclusively for strict product liability when a defect in his purchased automobile's electrical lines caused a fire, leading to a total loss of the vehicle. Jose did not suffer any personal injuries as a result of the incident. The auto manufacturer defended the claim of strict product liability on the basis that there were no personal injuries and the defect in the product only resulted in economic loss to Jose.

How does Jose's claim stand up to the manufacturer's defense?

• a.)Jose is likely to lose, because economic loss relatingonly to the product itself, as opposed to personal injuries,is nottypically recoverable under strict product liability.
• b.)Jose is likely to win, because economic loss is recoverable under strict product liability if a product is defective.
• c.)Jose is likely to lose, unless he can provide a reasonable alternative design to the product that would have prevented the fire.
• d.)Jose is likely to win, because there is no indication that he was aware of the defect in the automobile's electrical lines and elected to drive it anyway.