Explore BrainMass

Manufacturing negligence: was there intent to harm?

Are these statements true or false?

If a company admits that it sold a product with a manufacturing flaw that caused the plaintiff's injury, but offers the defense is that no amount of investigation, preparation, or quality control could have prevented the flaw, the company will almost always lose.

In order to prevail on a claim for negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff by a preponderance of the evidence.

Solution Preview


Products liability refers to the liability of any or all parties along the chain of manufacture of any product for damage caused by that product. This includes the manufacturer of component parts (at the top of the chain), an assembling manufacturer, the wholesaler, and the retail store owner (at the bottom of the chain). Products containing inherent defects that cause harm to a consumer of the product, or someone to whom the product was loaned, given, etc., are the subjects of products liability suits. While products are generally thought of as tangible personal property, products liability has stretched that definition to include intangibles (gas), naturals (pets), real estate (house), and writings (navigational charts).
Products liability claims can be based on negligence, strict liability, or breach of warranty of fitness depending on the ...

Solution Summary

Here is just a sample of what you'll find in this solution:

"Design defects are inherent; they exist before the product is manufactured. While the item might serve its purpose well, it can be unreasonably dangerous to use due to a design flaw."