Answer:
Market share liability
Explanation:
To understand the doctrine of market share liability, it is important to first know the meaning of market share itself.
Market share refers to the percentage of the overall sales of a particular industry that is generated by a company. It calculated by dividing the total sales of the firm during a specified period by the aggregate sales of the industry during the same period. This gives an idea what the size of a company is compared with its competitors in the industry.
From the question, market share of BDC for that drug i Ohio is believed to be 40% when the mother of the plaintiff was taking it.
Market share liability is a legal doctrine unique to the law of the U.S. which gives an opportunity to a plaintiff who sustained an injury from a fungible product to establish a prima facie case against the product based on the market share of the manufacturers of that product, regardless of whether or not knows the actual producer of the product.
Therefore, the state of the plaintiff follows the doctrine of market share liability if he is able to collect $40,000 which from BDC out of the $100,000.
Note:
The $40,000 is obtained after applying 40% market share of BDC to the $100,000 total damages.
I wish you the best.
Answer:
Ask how did he fall. where from. and why he believes it was the designer's fault.
Explanation:
Hope that helped
Explanation:
Procedural law consists of the set of rules that govern the proceedings of the court in criminal lawsuits as well as civil and administrative proceeds. Therefore, substantive law defines the rights and duties of the people, but procedural law lays down the rules with the help of which they are enforced
Answer:
The three-strikes law significantly increases the prison sentences of persons convicted of a felony who have been previously convicted of two or more violent crimes or serious felonies, and limits the ability of these offenders to receive a punishment other than a life sentence.
Explanation:
pls mark as brain list
This law is unlikely to be constitutional.
The Miranda warning is a type of notification that is given to criminal suspects who are in custody. This warning advises them of their right to remain silent, and that they are allowed to refuse answering questions or providing information to authorities. A case precedent that would support this instance is <em>Berkemer v. McCarty (1984)</em>. In this case, it was established that a person stopped, even for a misdemeanour, should receive the protections of the Fifth Amendment once in custody, regardless of how serious the offense is.
