1. Do you think that Assumption of the Risk should be a complete defense to a case of strict product liability? Meaning that the Plaintiff would win Zero. Or do you think that Assumption of the Risk should be treated like Comparative Negligence ?
2. In order to recover from a Defendant based on a theory of Wrongful (or Intentional) Interference with a Contract, such as an Employment Contract, the Plaintiff, Employer must prove:

a. there was a valid and enforceable contract of employment between the Employer and Employee

b. the Defendant knew of the existence of the contract

c. the Defendant induced the employee to breach the contract

d. all of the above