Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
What is this?
Less
More
Law Skool Advantage

138 members • $14/month

1 contribution to Law Skool Advantage
Torts Practice
What areas of torts do we need to focus on right now? I will pull a few MC to practice with you all this week! For now, here is a products liability question since it is a torts/contracts cross-over area (in other words it is a torts question but contract principles will help you solve it): The manufacturer made a product that was sold over the counter for treatment of dandruff and dry scalp conditions. A doctor purchases a bottle at a drugstore. A statement on the label read, "This product will not harm normal scalp or hair." The doctor used the product as directed. Bcause of a rare scalp condition making him allergic to one of the ingredients, the product irritated his scalp causeing him much pain and discomfort. In an action for negligence by the doctor against the manufacturer, which of the following additional facts or inferences, if it was the only one true. would be most effective in the manufacturer's defense?
Poll
14 members have voted
2 likes • May 2
option B seems like the best answer out of these choices. (1) the the label read that it would not damages "normal scalp and hair" and (2) it was mentioned that the doctor had a "rare" condition. If the company were to defends itself, their best argument would be that the damages caused were unforeseeable by a reasonable person.
2 likes • May 2
@David Harutunyan totally agree with this 8 page essay you wrote my good sir. Wonderful stuff!!!
1-1 of 1
Andrew Simonian
1
1 point to level up
@andrew-simonian-5446
1L Law Student

Active 100d ago
Joined Mar 22, 2026
Powered by