Intent, assault and battery — MCQs

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, prepare an objective case-assessment memorandum analyzing strict products-liability theories against the pressure washer manufacturer and retailer. Address manufacturing defect, design defect, failure to warn, causation, defenses, damages, and the immediate matter-management steps.

A beverage manufacturer filled and sealed a glass bottle containing a hairline crack that was not visible without specialized testing. A commercial distributor received the sealed bottle, stored it properly, and sold it to a grocery store without changing it. When a consumer opened the bottle in an ordinary manner, the bottle shattered and cut her hand. Experts agree that the crack existed when the bottle left both the manufacturer and the distributor and that the crack caused the break. The consumer asserts a strict products-liability claim against the distributor. Which of the following is the strongest conclusion?

A delivery driver was traveling 15 miles per hour above the posted limit when the driver approached a busy intersection. When the traffic light changed, the driver applied the brakes, but a negligently installed brake hose ruptured. The van entered the intersection and struck a pedestrian in a crosswalk. An accident reconstruction showed that, even with the ruptured hose, the van would have stopped before the crosswalk if it had been traveling at the posted speed. The pedestrian sued both the driver and the delivery company. The driver argues that the unexpected brake failure eliminates any causal connection between the speeding and the pedestrian's injury. Which of the following is the pedestrian's strongest response?

A cyclist negligently entered a marked crosswalk against a red light and struck a pedestrian, fracturing the pedestrian’s leg. An ambulance transported the pedestrian to a hospital. During transport, a paramedic, in blatant disregard of a mandatory safety protocol requiring stretchers to be secured before travel, grossly failed to secure the stretcher despite knowing that the ambulance would travel over a rough road. The stretcher shifted, causing an additional wrist fracture. Medical evidence establishes that the wrist fracture would not have occurred without the paramedic’s grossly negligent conduct. The pedestrian brings a negligence action against the cyclist seeking damages for both fractures. The cyclist concedes liability for the leg fracture but argues that the paramedic’s grossly negligent conduct cuts off liability for the wrist fracture. Which of the following is the strongest response?

During a labor demonstration, a courier became angry at an organizer standing near a building entrance. From 15 feet away, the courier threw a lightweight metal bottle toward the organizer, intending to make the organizer fear an imminent impact but not intending to hit him. The organizer saw the bottle and ducked. The bottle continued past him and struck a spectator who had not seen it coming, causing a cut that required stitches. The spectator retained a lawyer to pursue an intentional-tort claim against the courier. The courier admits that he intended to place the organizer in apprehension but argues that he neither knew of the spectator's presence nor intended to touch her. Which of the following best states the courier's liability to the spectator?