1957EngagedScholarship @ Cleveland State University (Cleveland State University)Open access

Product Warranty Liability

Lee E. Skeel

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Much has been said about the liability of a manufacturer to a sub-purchaser for injuries caused by his products. Actions against manufacturers, if based on the theory of negligence, offer obvious difficulties of proof. Actions based on implied or even express warranties often are defeated by lack of contract privity. There is however, a widespread misconception of the true nature of warranty. This misconception must result in unjust decisions in some cases. It therefore is desirable that the true nature of warranty be analyzed. Such analysis may disclose the proper relation of an express or implied warranty to the injury suffered from defective or otherwise dangerous manufactured products. For the sake of simplicity, this paper will omit discussion of proof of actual negligence, merely touch on proof of implied warranty, and concentrate on actual warranty in advertising and labeling of products.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Much has been said about the liability of a manufacturer to a sub-purchaser for injuries caused by his products. Actions against manufacturers, if based on the theory of negligence, offer obvious difficulties of proof. Actions based on implied or even express warranties often are defeated by lack of contract privity. There is however, a widespread misconception of the true nature of warranty. This misconception must result in unjust decisions in some cases. It therefore is desirable that the true nature of warranty be analyzed. Such analysis may disclose the proper relation of an express or implied warranty to the injury suffered from defective or otherwise dangerous manufactured products. For the sake of simplicity, this paper will omit discussion of proof of actual negligence, merely touch on proof of implied warranty, and concentrate on actual warranty in advertising and labeling of products.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Much has been said about the liability of a manufacturer to a sub-purchaser for injuries caused by his products. Actions against manufacturers, if based on the theory of negligence, offer obvious difficulties of proof. Actions based on implied or even express warranties often are defeated by lack of contract privity. There is however, a widespread misconception of the true nature of warranty. This misconception must result in unjust decisions in some cases. It therefore is desirable that the true nature of warranty be analyzed. Such analysis may disclose the proper relation of an express or implied warranty to the injury suffered from defective or otherwise dangerous manufactured products. For the sake of simplicity, this paper will omit discussion of proof of actual negligence, merely touch on proof of implied warranty, and concentrate on actual warranty in advertising and labeling of products.

Key concepts: Warranty, Product liability, Business, Product (mathematics), Liability, Actuarial science, Law, Mathematics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Product Warranty Liability — Research Paper | ScholarLens