Reference no: EM131623366

OVERVIEW

For this activity, each student will (i) draft a memorandum relating to the liability of Bryant Corporation and its employee for an accident that occurred while the employee was working for Bryant Corporation and (ii) draft a memorandum relating to the liability of Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers for defective brakes in an ambulance that it sold.

ASSESSMENT

This activity will be assessed using the Discussion Activity Grading Rubric located on the course website. This activity is worth a total of 40 points.

DEADLINES

Posts are due by 11:59 PM CST on Sunday, May 28.

OBJECTIVES

Develop the ability to communicate a general understanding of the civil dispute resolution system to a colleague.

Apply negligence law and product liability law to a real-world situation to begin to develop an understanding of potential liability faced by businesses and their employees.

Develop an ability to evaluate the merits of a lawsuit filed against a business.

FACT PATTERN

Bryant Corporation specializes in producing premium, custom wood baseball bats. Bryant Corporation is incorporated in Delaware and has its headquarters in Arizona. Bryant Corporation employs at least one sales representative in most states to enter into relationships with sporting goods stores to stock its baseball bats and to demo the baseball bats to potential customers to increase demand. Kyle (a citizen and resident of Illinois), the sales representative for Illinois, was driving from a meeting with a semi-pro baseball team to a local sporting goods store in central Illinois. As Kyle approached the sporting goods store, he was distracted by a phone call from the manager of the semi-pro baseball team informing Kyle that the team was placing a significant order for baseball bats. At the same time, John (a citizen and resident of Illinois) was walking across the street to enter into the parking lot for the store, but he was not walking in a designated cross walk (which, for purposes of this question, is against the law). Kyle crashes into John and John suffers a serious hip injury. At all times leading up to the accident, Kyle was driving the appropriate speed; however, it is clear from the evidence at the scene that Kyle would have been able to avoid crashing into John if Kyle was paying attention to the road instead of his phone call.

An ambulance owned by a local hospital arrived at the scene to rush John to the hospital. On the drive from the scene of the accident to the hospital, the brakes on the ambulance failed due to a manufacturing defect and the ambulance crashed into a car as the ambulance approached a traffic jam (such traffic jam was caused by the normal daily commute in the area). The crash would not have occurred but for the brake failure. As a result of this crash, John fell off the gurney and suffered a serious head injury. The hospital's ambulance, which was purchased from Andy's Ambulances (a retailer) and manufactured by Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers, was also destroyed. Specialty Vehicle Manufacturer did not manufacture the brakes on this ambulance - the brake manufacturer was Brad's Brakes.

Although John eventually fully recovers from both the serious hip injury and head injury, he incurs medical expenses of $75,000 to treat his hip injury and $150,000 to treat his head injury, and is unable to work for three months because of his head injury and loses his job as a result.

John is planning to file a lawsuit against Bryant Corporation* and Kyle. John is seeking $500,000 to cover his medical expenses and pain and suffering.

John also is planning to file a separate lawsuit based on product liability against Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers, and is seeking $300,000 in this separate lawsuit.

INSTRUCTIONS

Part I

You are the general counsel (i.e., the chief internal legal advisor) for Bryant Corporation. Please draft a memorandum to the chief executive officer of Bryant Corporation examining certain aspects of Bryant Corporation's exposure to liability arising out of the accident. Please focus your memorandum on answering the following questions:

Assuming for purposes of this question only that the lawsuit could be, and is, filed in Indiana state court, would Bryant Corporation and Kyle be able to remove the case to Indiana federal district court?

Assuming for purposes of this question only that the lawsuit could be, and is, filed in Arizona state court, what procedural and substantive law will the court apply?

Is it likely that John's lawsuit against Bryant Corporation and Kyle based on Kyle's negligence will be successful, including with respect to John's hip injury and head injury?

Would any defense to negligence raised by Bryant Corporation and Kyle be likely to succeed? If there is more than one defense that would potentially be available based on these facts, please describe each defense.

Part II

You are the general counsel for Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers and are in charge of advising Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers on its legal issues. Please draft a memorandum to the owner of Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers examining Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers' possible exposure to liability for the head injuries John suffered. Please focus your memorandum on answering the following questions:
Please explain whether Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers has any potential liability if John's lawsuit is based on the negligence theory of product liability.

Please explain whether Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers has any potential liability if John's lawsuit is based on the strict liability in tort theory of product liability.

Assuming solely for purposes of this question that Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers was determined to be liable under either the negligence theory or strict liability theory of product liability, what potential damages would John be able to recover from Specialty Vehicle Manufacturers?