Question

II. Whirring Co., a Delaware corporation, is the manufacturer of a combination juicer and blender called the Blaster, which blends fruits and vegetables into drinks. The unique technology that allows it to both juice and blend depends on extremely sharp blades which rotate at a very high speed.

In June, Jillian, a New York City resident, purchased a Blaster from Sur La Casa, a Delaware corporation. She regularly used the Blaster according to the instructions. In November, Tracy came to have brunch with Jillian. Jillian was excited to show off her Blaster and made Tracy a spinach and pineapple smoothie. Tracy was enjoying the drink when he felt a sharp pain in his mouth. Bleeding heavily, Tracy was rushed to the emergency room where he needed 60 stitches inside his mouth. Upon returning to Jillian’s, they discovered that pieces of the Blaster blades were in the smoothie.

Jillian later discovered that the blades from the Blaster machines tended to break off after repeated usage. Whirring had tested the blender during the manufacturing process but did not detect the problem, which was caused by the company’s decision to use the most inexpensive steel available for the blades. Over 500 other Blaster users had similar injuries to those sustained by Tracy. Tracy wants to sue for $1 million dollars in damages for his injuries.

In your essay, please discuss all of the following issues:

A.   How could Whirring Co. protect its “juice and blend” technology from being used by other manufacturers?

B.    Who can Tracy sue under a Strict Product Liability claim?

C.   Assume that Tracy lives on your block and you are his attorney. How does Tracy begin his lawsuit? Advise Tracy as to what courts he may choose to sue in and what papers are needed to start the lawsuit.

D.   Advise Tracy about how information will be gathered from Whirring to support his case. What kind of information would be requested?

E.   What will Tracy have to show to support his claim?

Please fully explain your answers, using all of the facts and legal arguments available to you.

Answer 1

A.) Intellectal property rights (IPR) are protected by way of copyrights, trademarks or patents. All these are intangible assets In the given case Whirring Co., could economically protect its unique product by way of a product patent. If successfull, only Whirring Co. could exclusively and economically exploit the invention for a prescribed length of time. It could also issue limited licenses to others on receipt of contracted royalties.

B) Tort is generally a civil wrong leading to encroachment of legal rights of another person. Doctrine of Strict liability under tort law upholds responsibility for defendant’s actions or products, without proof of negligence or fault.  The liability is regardless of intent or fault on part of Whirring Co.The principle of strict product liability applies against commercial seller (The defendant is a commercial seller in the given case);Both production defects and design defects are covered. Contributory negligence is not a defense (not relevant that Jilian or Tracy could have avoided the mishap by exercising extra care, observation & caution).

In light of the above, Tracy has a legal right to sue Whirring Co under the principles of Strict Product Liability.

C) Tracy's case need to start of on the very foundation of tort remedies as well as benevolent consumer protection legislations of the land. Tracy would need medical papers reltaed to her injury, data related to similar complaints received by Whirring Co. and some evidence regarding ownership or possession of the machine. Tarcy need to approach civil court of appropriate jurisdiction in terms of pecuniary compensation claimed and territory.

D) Whirring Co. product development, quality and manufacturing testing reports alongwith information related to other Blaster users who had similar injuries to those sustained by Tracy.

E) Tracy will have to show the presence of a legal right, infringment of that legal right by virtue of the defective product and resultant injury due to use of the product. Tracy as a plaintiff could claim both compensatory and pecuniary damages from Whirring Co.