Question

An infant was injured in an automobile accident when the vehicle, driven by the infant's

mother, left the roadway and rolled over down
an embankment. At the time of the accident,
the infant was buckled into an infant carrier
car seat. The carrier was designed to snap into
a base that was secured in the back seat by the
rear center seat belt. Prior to driving, the mother
had snapped the car carrier onto the base and
pulled up on the car carrier's handle to ensure
that the carrier was indeed secured in the base.
When the rollover occurred, however, the carrier
came loose from the base and was thrown about
the inside of the vehicle, causing injuries to the
infant's neck and face. The mother brought a
products liability action on behalf of the child
against the manufacturer of the car carrier,
alleging that the manufacturer was negligent in
the design of the base and seat combination.
If the mother establishes at trial that the
force of the rollover was enough to knock the
seat loose, and that a reasonable, economically
feasible alternative design existed, which of the
following, if true, would be most helpful to the
manufacturer's defense?
(A) The mother violated a statute by traveling
too fast for conditions, which caused the
rollover accident.
(B) No one had reported a car carrier coming
loose in a rollover prior to this accident.
(C) The car seat conformed with federal
labeling requirements.
(D) The retailer who sold the car seat was negligent in failing to notice the defect.

Answer 1

D.

Step-by-step explanation:

Option A. because we have no knowledge of the road conditions, nor how fast she was driving.

Option B. documentation reported this occurring.

Option C. that doesn't even make sense.

Option D is the only plausible answer.