need help
1. Defective Product: Instant Pot Explosion Lawsuit was filed by a customer name Otniel Ulloa on behalf of Johnson//Becker saying that the pressure cooker lid didn’t automatically lock like Instant Pot claimed it should have. This product was sold on Amazon, stating it was the best-selling product on the market. The manufacturer sold this product by promoting it to be the hottest thing and every household needs to purchase this product. It was marketed through television, social media, and other outlets. Many of these products have been linked to several lawsuits by clients who have been severely burned by exploding cookers leaving them wanting answers from the manufacturers since they’re not being pulled from the shelves at the local retailers, these pressure cookers companies are not warning the customers about the prior units of these safety issues. Under Wisconsin law, “[a] product is defective in design if the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design by the manufacturer and the omission of the alternative design renders the product not reasonably safe.” Wis. Stat. § 895.047(1)(a).
Moore v. Nat’l Presto Indus., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88382, *6-7, 118 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 887, 2022 WL 1555875 (W.D. Wis. May 17, 2022)
Also, the design defect of the Instant Pot states that this product is safe for everyone to use, however, this product doesn’t tell the customer that this product may malfunction the product was manufactured correctly, but the defect is inherent in the design of the product itself, which makes the product dangerous to consumers. when it comes down to this case, Instant Pot has had several lawsuits from victims suffering major burns on certain parts of their bodies.
2. Explain the contract product liability warranty- The contract liability states that it governs contracts for the sale of goods and includes several provisions for implied warranties. The case Niles V, Ariz Brands, Inc for Arizona Green Tea ginseng for energy would help the customers but the labels on the product didn’t show proof of the ingredients form which it claim to have. This case was in district court in New York with several defendants wanting their money back for false advertising. Arizona Beverage Company marketed this product unfairly with deceptive advertising which violated the customers who thought by purchasing this product would give them more energy throughout their day, to find out that this company used Instead, they use eleuthero, commonly known as “Siberian Ginseng.
Niles v. Ariz. Bevs. United States Llc, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135064, *8, 2021 WL 7906562 (E.D.N.Y. July 19, 2021)
This company has been using false misrepresentations about its products.
Sources:
1.Moore v. Nat’l Presto Indus., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88382, 118 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 887, 2022 WL 1555875 (United States District Court for the Western District of WisconsinMay 17, 2022, Filed). https://advance-lexis-com.libdatab.strayer.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:65GB-0G31-K054-G001-00000-00&context=1516831
2. Niles v. Ariz. Bevs. United States Llc, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135064, 2021 WL 7906562 (United States District Court for the Eastern District of New YorkJuly 19, 2021, Filed).
https://advance-lexis-com.libdatab.strayer.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:6361-1FV1-F81W-23YG-00000-00&context=1516831
3. Jennings, M. M. (2021). Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment (12th ed.). Cengage Learning US.
https://strayer.vitalsource.com/books/9780357447789
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
