Mr. Mattingly, a well-to-do farmer, has a legaal right to apply pesticides to his fruit trees. One year, he decided to hire a crop-dusting airplane to spread a pesticide on his orchard. An unexpected gust of wind blew the chemical onto a neighbor's beehives, killing all the bees. The neighbor sued Mattingly for the value of the 60 beehives. maaingly argued that a good fruit farmer has to apply pesticides and that the crop dusters had exercised extreme caution in applying the chemicals.
Problem 20.2
a. Was Mattingly negligent? Should strict liability apply to this case? Give your reasons.
b. How should Mattingly defend this case?
c. How would you decide this case? Explain your answer.
The Dangerous Dog
Five-year-old Matthew opens a gate and walks into his neighbors' yard to play with their dog. The neigbors' pit bull attacks Matthew, badly mauling his hand. The dog had never attacted anyone before. Matthew's parents sue the dog's owners for not keeping the animal inside or in a pen in the yard. The owners defend themselves by saying that even though there have been reports of attacks by other pit bulls, their had been affectionate with family members and had never shown any dangerous or destructive tendencies.
Problem 20.3
a. What arguements can you make Matthew's parents?
b. What arguements can you make for the dog's owners?
c.How should this case be decided? Why?
d. Would you have decided this case diffrently if Matthew had been 15? What if he had been 35?
The Exploding Gas Tank
A drunk driver crashes into the side of Gabriel's 1985 United Motors pickup truck, and Gabriel is killed.
His parents sue the manufaturer of the pickup truck. They contend that although Gabriel would have been injured, he would have survived the crash if the pickup truck's fuel tank had not caught fire and exploded. They also contend that the manufaturer was already aware of the customer complaints about the fuel tank, which was mounted outside the truck's steel frame,
The company resonds that the design of the truck was not defective and that Gabriel died from the collision caused by the drunk driver.
Problem 20.5
a. Why did Gabriel's parents sue the manufaturer of the truck?
b. What would help Gabriel's parents prove thier case?
c. What arguements should United Motors make in court?
d. Should the company be held responsible, even though the drunk driver hit Gabriel? Explain.
e. If the placement of the fuel tank faulty, what should United Motors do to the protect other drivers?
f.How would you decide the case? Give your reasons.