Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Product Liability Case: Moseley v. GM, Assignments of Introduction to Business Management

The product liability case of moseley v. Gm, where the plaintiff claimed that general motors (gm) was liable for the death caused by a defective product. The concept of product liability, the tort of negligence, and the defenses to product liability torts, including misuse of a product, contributory negligence, and assumption of risk. Gm's compliance with these defenses is analyzed in detail.

Typology: Assignments

Pre 2010

Uploaded on 08/18/2009

koofers-user-zjx
koofers-user-zjx 🇺🇸

10 documents

1 / 1

Toggle sidebar

Related documents


Partial preview of the text

Download Product Liability Case: Moseley v. GM and more Assignments Introduction to Business Management in PDF only on Docsity! Edward Marte Bus. Law 1312 Professor Raisner October 28, 2005 Moseley v. GM Assignment 1a. Product liability is a unique area of law. Product liability has benefits in that it attempts to decrease the negative effects by requiring a manufacturer’s insurer to pay for a defective product. A manufacturer is liable in cases where there aren’t proper instructions and warnings; also in cases of design defect and packaging errors. 1b. GM violated the tort of negligence, firstly because when Mosley purchased the vehicle from GM there was an established relationship; therefore, a duty of care was due. There was a proximate cause because the defections car was the cause of the death of Mosley (damages). 2a. The rules under the defenses to product liability torts are misuse of a product, contributory negligence and assumption of risk. 2b. GM met the requirements for the rules of defense to product liability. Under the misuse of product, GM could not anticipate the accident which occurred. Mosley misusing the vehicle was not the cause of the death; therefore, it was not the product itself that caused his death. There was an assumption of risk already in hand when Mosley purchased the vehicle. A consumer can’t be liable for accidents underwent by the customer similar to this case.
Docsity logo



Copyright © 2024 Ladybird Srl - Via Leonardo da Vinci 16, 10126, Torino, Italy - VAT 10816460017 - All rights reserved