• Complete research on strict and product liability related to similar cases. To search for cases, you could use the search terms "strict liability for failure to warn of inadequate tires."
• Address the three defenses the manufacturer provided.

Your law firm, Rothhams PLC, is working on a plaintiff's personal injury case. The law firm specializes in product liability and your client, Mark Flats, was injured in a car accident. Mark had purchased a new sports car a couple months ago. On the speedometer of the new car it showed that the car could be driven up to 180 miles per hour. Mark and his friend, George Wantabee, were at the bar throwing back a few beers and as they left, Mark said to George, "Hey, want to check out my new car?" Mark took George for a spin with his new car reaching speeds up to 130 miles per hour. As Mark turned a corner, he lost control of the car and crashed. George was injured along with Mark.

Upon looking at the scene of the accident, it was found that the tire tread had separated on one of the rear tires. Also, it appears that the tires were not damaged due to any type of road hazard or neglected cuts or other abuse in the treads. Your law firm is researching the tires and found out that they were only rated up to 90 miles per hour.

When looking over the materials that came with the car, the only thing that was mentioned about tires was to keep proper pressure in the tires.

Rothham PLC sued the car manufacture on a theory of strict liability for failure to warn of the inadequate tires and that these tires were designed improperly. The car manufacturer is stating that (1) they had no duty to warn; (2) the manufacturer is not responsible for the tires on the car; and (3) the plaintiff had been drinking and driving up to 130 miles per hour.