Question for the DOE v. MILES LABORATORIES, INC. Sometimes the injured party is

Question

Question for the DOE v. MILES LABORATORIES, INC.

Sometimes the injured party is not the purchaser but a their party or bystander. Because these parties do not respond to the price charged for the product, proper incentives for allocatively efficient behavior can be created only by imposing liability on the manufacturer or purchaser. Consider the case of Richman v. Charter Arms Corp., 571 F.Supp. 192 (E.D.La. 1983). The plaintiff was the victim of a shooting by a handgun. Unable to recover her damages from the shooter, the victim sued the manufacturer claiming that the manufacturer should be strictly liable, on the theory that the defendant's activity should be classified as ultrahazardous.

QUESTION: If the price of handguns is to reflect the external costs imposed by their use, should the gun manufacturer be held strictly liable for damages associated with shootings involving its guns?

Explanation / Answer

As per the given case, the manufacturer is not liable because its very much clear that guns are used for the purpose of shooting but the way purchaser used it was in a wrong action. Therefore he is completely liable for the damages occured.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse Q
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.