Waiver of Liability and Product Liability (Essay Sample)

Waiver of Liability and Product Liability Student's Name Institution's Name Professor's Name Date Waiver of Liability and Product Liability A waiver of liability is a legal agreement that informs about the potential danger of engaging in an activity. It is a valid contract whose purpose is to protect the parties. The releaser will sign this contract to prove that they will not sue the company or entity for damages, losses, or injury while engaging in the stipulated activities. Liability waivers are designed depending on the industry and the threat. Kraulin (2022) affirms that the liability waivers inform the client of the potential risk and include a voluntary expectation of risk and a release clause. In this agreement, the liability waiver protects Lori's employer from the damages caused by the accidents. This contract safeguards the employer from the financial ramifications of employee injury lawsuits (Keating, 2021). Both parties assumed voluntary risk because the mower is a machine, and accidents are bound to happen. Lori understood the risks before she signed the waiver to get the job. The contract is valid and stands against potential loss. Lori's Waiver of Liability Lori's liability waiver with the mower company is relevant to this analysis. The agreement to waive liability for injuries caused by the mower machines prevented Lori from suing her employer. Additionally, Cheng et al. (2023) contend that Brian constantly reminded his employees not to worry while on the job because the company would protect them. Brian's verbal encouragement directly contradicted the waiver liability contract his employees signed. Brian's assertions were not legally binding, while the waiver of liability waiver is valid. Brian's verbal promises cannot be included in the valid contracts. Brian could not guarantee the safety of the mower machines despite his good intentions to protect the employees. Peta's Claims Peta sued the mower manufacturer for product liability. Peta claimed the manufacturer was liable for defects in design and manufacturing and for failing to warn. Peta's lawsuits against the mower manufacturer do not hold ground. The Ferrari 2000 has a warning to replace the sandpaper liner every three years (Kraulin, 2022; Cheng et al., 2023). Lori's employer followed the directive and replaced the sandpaper accordingly. Lori flipped and fell, leaving the mower to run over Peta's priced roses. Product liability is a legal provision that holds the manufacturer or seller liable for damages resulting from defective products they produce or sell. Product liability lawsuits may arise from the buyer, the user, or a third party affected by a product's defects (Cheng et al., 2023). Furthermore, this provision aims to prevent negligence and substandard products from entering the market. The policy can cover damages caused by a manufacturer or seller's breach of warranty. Peta cannot prove that the mower manufacturer did not give adequate, direct, and timely replacement warnings. The Ferrari 2000 manufacturer warned about the wear and tear of this mower's sandpaper liner (Kraulin, 2022). Consequently, Lori's employer adhered to the servicing directives from the Ferrari 2000 manufacturer. Peta's claim on failure to warn as a product liability case does not fulfill the legal requirements. Another aspect of the product liability lawsuit is founded on manufacturing and design defects. The lawn mower has functioned in good condition for 3 years. Lori's employer has serviced the lawn mower accordingly. In this case, Peta cannot prove the presence of a manufacturing defect that caused the accident (Kraulin, 2022). The Ferrari 2000 manufacturer provided guidelines for using the mower based on the available technology. The Ferrari 2000 consisted of parts and technology relevant to its price point and intended use. The manufacturer fulfilled the production process and was not liable for the accident that affected Peta's prized roses. The roses were approximately priced at USD 10,000, a notable financial value. Compensation Law or Tort Lori may have a case against Brian's mower company for compensation of damages. The waiver of liability waiver can be unenforceable in some circumstances. Keating (2021) affirm that the provision of strict liability requires that the company be held responsible for injuries caused by its assets regardless of the intention. For this reason, Brian's business could be held liable for injuries under compensation law and tort. The company provided Lori with this mower, which harmed her. The court may dismiss the liability waiver if the mower malfunctions and injures its operator (Kraulin, 2022). Nonetheless, this case concerns an accident following Lori's slip on the grass. Brian's business could argue against compensation law or tort because its assets did not injure Lori. On the contrary, Lori injured her finger on the grass. The basis for a lawsuit founded on compensation law or tort is not solid. The claim of compensation under tort is the legally binding liability that arises from a breach of duty founded upon the law. Lori suffered an injury at work, and the employer was required to protect her. The law directs employers to ensure safe working conditions which prevent harm (Keating, 2021). In this case, the lawn mower injury happened at work, and Brian's company could fall liable for a lawsuit. The lawsuit could claim that Brian's mower company should pay Lori for the pain, injury, and damages caused by this accident. On the contrary, Brian's company could argue that the waiver liability is enfor...