Bag | ~] mail. Self- M Sent Stron LSAT The Febr June stude Torts Pract West https://lp.uworld.com/test-app/legal/v16/assignment/55/649858/171556303/54469/14125/2/1/2 51/54 v An experienced construction company purchased sand in bulk from a distributor. The construction company mixed the sand with water and cement to make concrete. The distributor knew that an improper ratio of sand, water, and cement would result in defective concrete, but the distributor played no role in determining the ratio used by the construction company in mixing the concrete. The construction company used the concrete to form supporting columns for a building. A year later, the building collapsed during a minor earthquake, causing injury to the occupants. Although the sand was not defective, the concrete forming the columns was defective because the mixture ratio of the sand, water, and cement was not proper. The defective concrete was a cause in fact of the collapse. Do the injured building occupants have viable strict liability claims against the sand distributor? A. No, because component suppliers are not strictly liable in tort. O B. No, because the distributor neither advised nor participated with the construction company in determining the mixture of sand, water, and cement. C. Yes, because the concrete columns were defective. D. Yes, because the distributor knew that an improper mixture of sand, water, and cement would result in defective concrete. Submit