Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Link Copied!

Question

1 Approved Answer

Soup Co. manufactured, sold, and shipped cans of chicken-flavored Noodle Soup to a distributor. The distributor sold and shipped the cans to Associated Grocers. Associated

image text in transcribed

Soup Co. manufactured, sold, and shipped cans of chicken-flavored Noodle Soup to a distributor. The distributor sold and shipped the cans to Associated Grocers. Associated Grocers shipped the soup to Warehouse Foods, a retail grocer. Six weeks after Soup Co. first shipped the soup, Warehouse Foods sold a can of the soup to Kate Smith. Smith prepared the soup according to the instructions on the can. As she began to eat it, she discovered several beetle larvae in the noodles. While she felt disgusted, she suffered no physical symptoms from eating the soup. Nevertheless, she filed a lawsuit in a Washington state court against Soup Co. on a theory of strict product liability. The court most likely held that Soup Co. was: O a. strictly liable, because it did not warn consumers that the soup could contain inedible substances. O b. not strictly liable, because Smith did not have any physical harm by consumption of the product. O c. not strictly liable, because Smith assumed the risk when she purchased the soup. O d. strictly liable, because of the presence of bugs in its product. Soup Co. manufactured, sold, and shipped cans of chicken-flavored Noodle Soup to a distributor. The distributor sold and shipped the cans to Associated Grocers. Associated Grocers shipped the soup to Warehouse Foods, a retail grocer. Six weeks after Soup Co. first shipped the soup, Warehouse Foods sold a can of the soup to Kate Smith. Smith prepared the soup according to the instructions on the can. As she began to eat it, she discovered several beetle larvae in the noodles. While she felt disgusted, she suffered no physical symptoms from eating the soup. Nevertheless, she filed a lawsuit in a Washington state court against Soup Co. on a theory of strict product liability. The court most likely held that Soup Co. was: O a. strictly liable, because it did not warn consumers that the soup could contain inedible substances. O b. not strictly liable, because Smith did not have any physical harm by consumption of the product. O c. not strictly liable, because Smith assumed the risk when she purchased the soup. O d. strictly liable, because of the presence of bugs in its product

Step by Step Solution

There are 3 Steps involved in it

Step: 1

blur-text-image

Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions

See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success

Step: 2

blur-text-image

Step: 3

blur-text-image

Ace Your Homework with AI

Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance

Get Started

Recommended Textbook for

Asset Allocation Strategies For Mutual Funds Evaluating Performance Risk And Return

Authors: Giuseppe Galloppo

1st Edition

3030761274,3030761282

More Books

Students also viewed these Finance questions