Law School

Academic Achievement

 
 
 
The John Marshall Law School  Programs & Degrees  |  Law School Directory  |  Search & Site Map  |  Contact  |  Catalog  | Home
Home > Academic Achievement >

Weekly Bar Question 02/04/08

Motorco is a manufacturer of motor vehicles.  A federal regulation requires that all motor vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States be equipped with seat belts for each passenger and prescribes specifications for such belts.  Motorco equipped all its cars with seat belts.  It purchased all the bolts used in its seat belt assemblies from Boltco and it tested samples from each shipment received.

Dunn purchased a motor vehicle manufactured by Motorco.  While operating the car, with Price as a passenger in the front seat, Dunn collided with another vehicle.  The collision was due solely to Dunn's negligence.  Price had his seat belt fastened, but one of the bolts which anchored the belt to the frame broke.  Price was thrown through the windshield, sustaining various injuries.  Dunn, whose belt was fastened and held, was killed when, following the collision, the car went off the road, down an embankment, and overturned. 

Subsequent to the accident, tests of the bolt that broke showed metallurgical defects.  Motorco's records showed that tests of samples from the shipment in which the defective bolt was received revealed no defective bolts. 

In a negligence action by Price against Motorco, the proof needed to establish a prima facie case is

(A)             only that the bolt was defective.

(B)             that the bolt was defective and had not been inspected by Motorco.

(C)            that the bolt was defective, was inspected by Motorco, and the defect was not discovered.

(D)            that the bolt was defective and the defect would have been discovered if Motorco had exercised reasonable care in the inspection of component parts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Answer


Last Updated On: 8/11/08