What rule court use in stahlecker v ford motor co case


Question: What RULE (law) did the court use in the Stahlecker v Ford Motor Co case? (Choose TWO correct answers) Multiple select question. The criminal act of a third person is a superseding cause of harm to another unless there is a special relationship Ford and Firestone failed to exercise reasonable care in designing and manufacturing their tires and failed to warn their users Foreseeability and proximate cause must include the possibility of a tortious or criminal act Any intentional breach of this duty is the proximate cause of harm

 

Request for Solution File

Ask an Expert for Answer!!
Other Subject: What rule court use in stahlecker v ford motor co case
Reference No:- TGS03403327

Expected delivery within 24 Hours