contract torts and product liability
Contracts, Torts and Product Liability
Name
Institution
Chapters 6 and 7 of John McAdams book are on contracts, business torts, and product liability respectively. In order to understand these chapters fully, I will provide an appropriate case and the court’s ruling due to the influence of factors discussed in these two chapters. Before I discuss this case, an introduction on the keywords in these chapters in relation to business law is necessary. A contract is a binding legal agreement reached between two or more parties. The agreement has to be voluntary and the parties involved have to be aspiring to make legal obligations between them. In describing elements involved in a contract there to be, there has to be an acceptance with a legal consideration. This law is variant from one jurisdiction to the next, but the basics of it remain the same. In a summary statement, any promise made willingly that the law can enforce is a contract. This is the main theme in the sixth chapter and as an aspiring business graduate, my understanding of it will be imperative analysing the case study and giving my opinion.
Under product liability, the seventh chapter explains this as the liability that a manufacturer of a product incurs due to injury caused by their product to the consumer. Product liability has three major theories currently reported in America. They include breach of warranty, negligence, and consumer protection claims. Business torts and product liability have a relationship in that they both are crimes to consumers. The difference arises in that product liability is to the general consumer public while torts are the breaches that affect one particular person. The terminologies discussed in the introductory part will be clearer as I conclude the article due to application of cases to summarize them.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court addressed the Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh in December 2013. It
Name
Institution
Chapters 6 and 7 of John McAdams book are on contracts, business torts, and product liability respectively. In order to understand these chapters fully, I will provide an appropriate case and the court’s ruling due to the influence of factors discussed in these two chapters. Before I discuss this case, an introduction on the keywords in these chapters in relation to business law is necessary. A contract is a binding legal agreement reached between two or more parties. The agreement has to be voluntary and the parties involved have to be aspiring to make legal obligations between them. In describing elements involved in a contract there to be, there has to be an acceptance with a legal consideration. This law is variant from one jurisdiction to the next, but the basics of it remain the same. In a summary statement, any promise made willingly that the law can enforce is a contract. This is the main theme in the sixth chapter and as an aspiring business graduate, my understanding of it will be imperative analysing the case study and giving my opinion.
Under product liability, the seventh chapter explains this as the liability that a manufacturer of a product incurs due to injury caused by their product to the consumer. Product liability has three major theories currently reported in America. They include breach of warranty, negligence, and consumer protection claims. Business torts and product liability have a relationship in that they both are crimes to consumers. The difference arises in that product liability is to the general consumer public while torts are the breaches that affect one particular person. The terminologies discussed in the introductory part will be clearer as I conclude the article due to application of cases to summarize them.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court addressed the Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh in December 2013. It