Larry Johnson bought a new Chevrolet from Joe’s Chevy. Chevrolet’s are made by general motors’ corporation (gmc). Four years later, johnson crashed into the rear of another car while travelling to work. Johnson did not see that the car had stopped because he was texting his girlfriend. The speed of johnson’s vehicle at the time of the crash was estimated to be less than 35 miles per hour. A properly functioning seatbelt will restrain the driver from impact with the steering wheel and the windshield during a crash at a speed of up to 40 miles per hour. During the crash, the seatbelt that johnson was properly wearing broke away from its anchor, causing johnson to be thrown against the steering wheel and into the windshield. Johnson received a fractured vertebra, broken ribs, and a fractured left arm. Johnson sued gmc, chevrolet, and the dealership that sold him the vehicle. Johnson claimed in his lawsuit that because the seat belt broke, the defendants were strictly liable for his injuries. He also argued that all parties were negligent. Investigation determined that the seatbelt anchor was both inadequate to sustain the forces involved in restraining a person during a crash, and had been installed in a manner that increases the likelihood of failure during a crash. Write a persuasive argument defending your position.

Cover the following:

1. Are the defendants strictly liable to johnson? Why or why not?

2. What are the legal responsibilities and liabilities?

3. Would an issue such as these impact small and large businesses? Explain your answer.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In such situations where one knows the retailers and the producers of good bought the sales agent is ... View the full answer