I.

Peter Griffin visited a Super-Mart store. While waddling down a busy isle near the food court, Peter slipped and fell, when he stepped in some macaroni & cheese, which had apparently come from the food court. Peter sued Super-Mart for his injuries. At trial Peter testified that the macaroni appeared "to have a lot of dirt and footprints on it", suggesting that the spilled macaroni had been on the floor for some time.

• What duty does a business have to protect its customers from dangerous conditions ?
• What does Peter need to prove, in order to recover damages from Super-Mart?
• What Defenses might Super-Mart raise?
• Should Super-Mart be liable to Peter ? Why or why not ?

II.

Bob's brother purchased a "weed wacker" from Home Depot, and gave it to Bob as a gift. The WW was manufactured by KnowGood, Inc. in outer Mongolia.

While operating the WW, Bob was seriously injured when the WW flew apart. It was later determined that KnowGood had used defective parts, and failed to provide adequate safety guards, which would have prevented Bob's injuries. Bob was not wearing any protective gear.

If Bob were to sue for his injuries,Please DISCUSSthe following:

What theories of products liability might he consider?

What parties can he sue?

If he were to sue under the theory Strict Products Liability, what defects might he allege?

What Defenses might be raised?