Question

Tolbert lost his leg in an industrial accident. Ortho Hospital treated the original injury, and then provided and fitted a prosthetic leg. Ortho also trained Tolbert in the use of the prosthesis. After his release from Ortho, Tolbert was injured while out walking because his prosthesis broke due to a defect in the materials. Tolbert fell and suffered injuries. Tolbert now sues Ortho Hospital in strict products liability for selling him a defective prosthetic leg. Who will prevail? A. Tolbert will prevail because Ortho sold him the defective prosthesis. B. Tolbert will prevail because strict liability is applied to the provision of hospital services. C. Ortho will prevail only if it sold the prosthesis "as is." D. Ortho will prevail because this situation represents the provision of services rather than the sale of a product.

Answer 1

Ortho Hospital is likely to prevail in the lawsuit.

Step-by-step explanation:

In this scenario, the legal principle of strict products liability is applicable. However, determining liability involves analyzing whether the prosthetic leg can be classified as a product or a service. While Ortho Hospital provided the prosthetic leg, their primary service was healthcare, not the sale of goods. They treated Tolbert's original injury, provided the prosthetic leg as part of his treatment, and trained him in its use, which is more aligned with a service than a product sale.

Strict liability generally applies to manufacturers or sellers in the chain of distribution. Ortho Hospital's role was more about providing a medical service—treating Tolbert's injury and aiding his rehabilitation—rather than functioning as a manufacturer or seller in the prosthetic leg market. The hospital's liability is usually limited to the quality of care and services rendered, rather than strict product liability for defects in the prosthetic leg.

Additionally, the concept of "as is" doesn't significantly apply here since the focus is on healthcare services. If Ortho Hospital explicitly sold the prosthetic leg separately and as a product, the scenario might lean more towards product liability. However, given the nature of the hospital's role in providing comprehensive healthcare services, Ortho Hospital is less likely to be held liable for the defective prosthetic leg under strict products liability.