A homeowner was injured when an automatic cutoff switch failed to function on a snowblower he was using. The cutoff switch had f
unctioned well for a year after he purchased the snowblower but failed after the machine had been improperly repaired by a mechanic. The snowblower’s operating manual contained a clear and prominent warning against making the same alteration to the switch mechanism made by the mechanic. The mechanic, however, did not have a manual available when he repaired the snowblower. Does the homeowner have a viable claim against the manufacturer of the snowblower for damages? a. No, because the homeowner was comparatively negligent in failing to furnish the snowblower’s manual to the mechanic. b. No, because the injury resulted from a substantial alteration of the snowblower by a third party. c. Yes, because a defect in the snowblower caused the homeowner’s injury. d. Yes, because the manufacturer should have made the manual available to repair personnel.
The answer I want to be true is "true". I was in a situation as a defendant. The children of unwed parents prosecuting me had me see a forensic psychologist and a psychiatrist. My attorney should have had me see a doctor that should be on my side.
