Bugusa Case Study
University of Phoenix Material
BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet
Use the scenarios in the BUGusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions.
Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement
Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain.
A Tort was committed by WIRETIME, Inc. which means “a civil wrong where on party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, S.P., 2011) The statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. will potentially harm Bugusa, Inc. reputation. A statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. accusing Bugusa, Inc. products were low quality and did not work past a months’ time. This type of statement is a defamatory “A false and defamatory …show more content…
(Melvin, 2011) states “Negligence is an accidental (without willful intent) event that caused harm to another party.” (p.208). The defenses available to BUGusa are comparative negligence and assumption of risk. Using comparative negligence, BUGusa would argue the cause of the accident was partly, or ultimately, Randy’s fault by not yielding the right of way. Under this defense, BUGusa would ask a jury to assign, by way of percentage, a proportion of blame to each party – e.g. 30% Brain and 70% Randy. In this example, Brian/BUGusa would only be required to pay 30% of the damages …show more content…
According to (Melvin, 2011) “Products liability refers to the liability of any seller (including the manufacturer, retailer, and any intermediary seller such as a wholesaler) of a product that, because of a defect, causes harm to a consumer.” (P.226). Sally could argue BUGusa were negligent by not including the insulation needed on the equipment just to save on production costs. However, a more appealing option for Sally to pursue would be a strict liability tort because she doesn’t need to prove the elements of negligence. Sally could argue that BUGusa are strictly liable for her injuries because they placed a product on the market without insulation and she was injured as a
BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet
Use the scenarios in the BUGusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions.
Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement
Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain.
A Tort was committed by WIRETIME, Inc. which means “a civil wrong where on party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, S.P., 2011) The statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. will potentially harm Bugusa, Inc. reputation. A statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. accusing Bugusa, Inc. products were low quality and did not work past a months’ time. This type of statement is a defamatory “A false and defamatory …show more content…
(Melvin, 2011) states “Negligence is an accidental (without willful intent) event that caused harm to another party.” (p.208). The defenses available to BUGusa are comparative negligence and assumption of risk. Using comparative negligence, BUGusa would argue the cause of the accident was partly, or ultimately, Randy’s fault by not yielding the right of way. Under this defense, BUGusa would ask a jury to assign, by way of percentage, a proportion of blame to each party – e.g. 30% Brain and 70% Randy. In this example, Brian/BUGusa would only be required to pay 30% of the damages …show more content…
According to (Melvin, 2011) “Products liability refers to the liability of any seller (including the manufacturer, retailer, and any intermediary seller such as a wholesaler) of a product that, because of a defect, causes harm to a consumer.” (P.226). Sally could argue BUGusa were negligent by not including the insulation needed on the equipment just to save on production costs. However, a more appealing option for Sally to pursue would be a strict liability tort because she doesn’t need to prove the elements of negligence. Sally could argue that BUGusa are strictly liable for her injuries because they placed a product on the market without insulation and she was injured as a