Categories
Home/Law/A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?

A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?

The Scripto-Tokai corporation manufactured utility lighters, which were intended for use around the household. As such, the tools could be expected to be safe for the application by adult family members and not accessible to children. As shown by the circumstances behind the cases discussed in this paper, children may sometimes gain access to tools that are not intended for their use. Thus, potentially dangerous instruments should have mechanisms in place to prevent unintended usage.

The parents are responsible for the safety of their children. So, the claim can be made that the manufacturer should not be liable for situations that arise from a mishandling of the product. Many different household tools and appliances can lead to harm if children are allowed access to them. The restriction of access to individuals who can use the items responsibly is the duty of the parents, and one can argue that failure to do so should be blamed on them.

Rate the answer:
Views: 37
Answer by Academic.tip's expert
An answer to this question is provided by one of our experts who specializes in law. Let us know how much you liked it and give it a rating.

Cite this page

Select a citation style:

References

Academic.Tips. (2021) 'A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why'. 22 June.

Reference

Academic.Tips. (2021, June 22). A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why? https://academic.tips/question/a-product-is-unreasonably-dangerous-when-it-is-dangerous-beyond-expectations-of-the-ordinary-consumer-whose-expectations-apply-in-the-calles-v-scripto-tokai-corp-case-why/

References

Academic.Tips. 2021. "A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?" June 22, 2021. https://academic.tips/question/a-product-is-unreasonably-dangerous-when-it-is-dangerous-beyond-expectations-of-the-ordinary-consumer-whose-expectations-apply-in-the-calles-v-scripto-tokai-corp-case-why/.

1. Academic.Tips. "A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?" June 22, 2021. https://academic.tips/question/a-product-is-unreasonably-dangerous-when-it-is-dangerous-beyond-expectations-of-the-ordinary-consumer-whose-expectations-apply-in-the-calles-v-scripto-tokai-corp-case-why/.


Bibliography


Academic.Tips. "A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?" June 22, 2021. https://academic.tips/question/a-product-is-unreasonably-dangerous-when-it-is-dangerous-beyond-expectations-of-the-ordinary-consumer-whose-expectations-apply-in-the-calles-v-scripto-tokai-corp-case-why/.

Work Cited

"A product is “unreasonably dangerous” when it is dangerous beyond expectations of the ordinary consumer. Whose expectations apply in the Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp. case? Why?" Academic.Tips, 22 June 2021, academic.tips/question/a-product-is-unreasonably-dangerous-when-it-is-dangerous-beyond-expectations-of-the-ordinary-consumer-whose-expectations-apply-in-the-calles-v-scripto-tokai-corp-case-why/.

Copy
Imagine that you are a judge preparing to sentence an offender who was just found guilty at a jury trial on two counts of bank robbery. Address the following questions: What would you need to know about the defendant to impose a sentence? What specific information would you need to know about the offense to aid in sentencing? What are the top 5 factors you would consider in fashioning a sentence? What would be 2 aggravating and mitigating factors to consider in this case?
A product is also “unreasonably dangerous” when its maker fails to use an alternative design that was economically feasible and less dangerous. Scripto-Tokai Corporation contended that because its product was “simple” and the danger was “obvious,” it should not be liable under this test. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
Check the price of your paper