Andrew is a licensed professional carpenter who often works with his brother Benny, an unemployed philosopher, on carpentry jobs. On one of those jobs, Andrew cuts off a finger while working with cheap hand saw he often uses on jobs even though he knows that carpenters do not like using that saw because its danger and cheapness are well known in the carpentry industry. Despite the poor reputation of the saw, Andrew uses it because he does not want to buy one of the better, far more expensive professional saws out there and because the maker of that cheap saw pays Andrew $ 500 a month to use it and do TV commercials for the saw. Incredibly, that saw is the most popular saw among regular consumers which makes no sense since it is so dangerous. The problem is that only professional carpenters know of that danger and the average consumer never uses it to do the more dangerous work anyway. Please briefly discuss each of the following with reasons for your conclusions:

A) Suppose that Andrew sues the maker of the saw for strict liability for his harm. As a lawyer for the maker, how would you defend against Andrew's claim and why?

B) Suppose instead that Benny cuts his hand with a knife he is using and wants to sue the maker of the knife, claiming it was very sharp. As a lawyer for that maker, how would you defend against Benny's claim and why?

C) Finally suppose that Benny injures his hand when using a defective hammer and sues 40 months later when that hand really starts to hurt. How will Benny's claim go and why?