3. If the plaintiff sues the manufacturer to recover the loss he has suffered as a result of the destruction of the cabinet's original finish, will the plaintiff prevail?

The plaintiff purchased the paint stripper and used it on his cabinet, being very careful to follow the accompanying instructions exactly. Despite the plaintiff's care, the original finish of the cabinet was irreparably damaged. When finally refinished, the cabinet was worth less than 20% of what it would have been worth if the original finish had been preserved. No other removal technique could have preserved the original finish.

A professional restorer of antique furniture recommended that the plaintiff use a specific paint stripper to remove the paint and varnish from the cabinet. The plaintiff obtained and read a sales brochure published by the company who manufactures the paint stripper, which contained the following statement: «This product will renew all antique furniture. Will not damage original oil finishes.»

At a country auction, a plaintiff acquired an antique cabinet that he recognized as an extremely rare and valuable collector's item. Unfortunately, the plaintiff's cabinet had several coats of varnish and paint over the original oil finish. Its potential value could only be realized if these layers could be removed without damaging the original finish. Much of the value of the cabinet depends on the condition of a unique oil finish, the secret of which died with the original inventor.

Yes, because no other known removal technique would have preserved the original finish
Yes, because the loss would not have occurred had the statement in the brochure been true
No, because the product was not defective when sold by the manufacturer
No, because the product was not dangerous to persons

« PreviousSkipNext »

Show clarification Download PDF

A products liability claim may be brought by a plaintiff under multiple different theories: (i) intent; (ii) negligence; (iii) strict liability; (iv) implied warranties; and (v) express warranties. The prima facie case for a products liability claim based in strict liability includes (i) a commercial supplier of a product; (ii) producing or selling a defective product; (iii) actual and proximate cause; and (iv) damages. The plaintiff must prove that the defect existed when the product left the defendant's control. For liability to attach, the product must also reach the plaintiff without substantial alteration. Generally, privity between the parties is irrelevant except for certain warranty theories of liability.

Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts, ordinary contributory negligence is not a defense in a strict products liability action where the plaintiff merely failed to discover the defect or guard against its existence, or where the plaintiff's misuse was reasonably foreseeable. However, assumption of risk may be a defense, where the plaintiff engaged in voluntary and unreasonable conduct and used the product despite discovering the defect and being aware of the danger.

Liability for misrepresentation occurs when a representation by the seller about a product induces reliance by the buyer. Liability for misrepresentation is usually based on strict liability in products cases. The plaintiff must show (i) the defendant is a seller engaged in the business of selling such products; (ii) misrepresentation must be of a material fact; (iii) intent to induce reliance of the buyer; (iv) justifiable reliance, (v) actual reliance; and (vi) proximate cause and damages.

B is correct. The plaintiff will be able to recover because the loss at issue would not have occurred had the statement in the brochure been true. Misrepresentation by manufacturers or suppliers is a type of products liability claim based on strict liability. In order for a plaintiff to recover damages, the misrepresentation must have been a misrepresentation of a material fact concerning the quality or character of the product, and the plaintiff must have been injured after relying on this misrepresentation.

Here, the plaintiff used the manufacturer's paint stripper on an antique cabinet after relying on the manufacturer's pamphlet that falsely claimed the product would restore antique furniture without damaging the original finish. However, when the plaintiff used the product as directed, it damaged the cabinet's original finish and significantly diminished its value. Therefore, because the manufacturer misrepresented a material fact and the plaintiff experienced a financial loss he would recover against the manufacturer.

A is incorrect. Although the plaintiff will be able to recover, the fact that no other known removal technique would have preserved the original finish is irrelevant. The plaintiff's claim is based on the fact that the manufacturer made a public misrepresentation of material fact which the plaintiff relied on to his detriment, not that the product is otherwise defective. Therefore, the plaintiff can recover against the manufacturer even if no product on the market can produce the results which the manufacturer here falsely claimed.

C is incorrect. Although a product not being defective at the time it left the manufacturer will cut off a manufacturer's liability on a design or manufacturing defect claim, the claim here concerns a manufacturer's misrepresentation of material fact. The claim here concerns a manufacturer's misrepresentation of a material fact. Therefore, whether the product was defective at the time it left the manufacturer's control is irrelevant.

D is incorrect. Because the plaintiff's claim is based on misrepresentation of a material fact by the manufacturer, the fact that the product was otherwise not dangerous is irrelevant and would not bar the plaintiff from recovering damages.

Comments (0)

There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it

3. If the plaintiff sues the manufacturer to recover the loss he has suffered as a result of the destruction of the cabinet's original finish, will the plaintiff prevail?

Comments (0)

Trial period expired