Cаrcо mаnufаctures mоtоr vehicles. A federal regulation requires that all motor vehicles manufactured for sale in the U.S. be equipped with seat belts for each passenger and prescribes the specifications for those seat belts. Carco equipped all its cars with seat belts. It purchased all the bolts used in its seat belt assemblies from Metalco. Carco also tested samples of the bolts from each shipment received from Metalco. Tony purchased a motor vehicle manufactured by Carco. While operating the car with Tammy as a passenger in the front seat, Tony collided with another vehicle. The collision was solely due to Tony’s negligence. Tammy had her seat belt fastened, but one of the bolts which anchored the belt to the frame broke. Tammy was thrown through the windshield of the car sustaining serious injuries. Tony, whose seat belt was fastened, and which held at the time of the collision, was killed when, following the collision, the car went off the road, down an embankment, and overturned. Subsequent to the accident, tests of the bolt that broke showed metallurgical defects in the bolt. Carco’s records showed that tests of samples from the shipment in which the defective bolt was received revealed no defective bolts. If there is guest statute in the state where the accident occurred, then in any action by Tammy against Carco, the guest statute has what effect?
Picture9.jpg
Picture3.jpg
Which is NOT true оf оur current envirоnmentаl problems of the Eаrth?