Assessment of Genie Industries Inc. Paper
Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
Perfect Number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
Assessment of Genie Industries Inc. Paper
Assessment, Genie, Industries, Inc., Paper
Brief Fact Summary.
James Boggan and Walter Matak, employees of Gulf Coast Electric, used an AWP-40S aerial work platform manufactured and sold by Genie Industries, Inc. (Genie) (defendant) to perform work. The 1,000-pound versatile lift contained a platform on which an individual could stand.
Boggan retracted the four stabilizers and attempted to move the lift with Matak on the raised platform and the machine fell. Matak suffered massive head injuries and died. Representatives of Walter Matak’s estate (plaintiffs) filed suit against Genie based upon an alleged design defect in the AWP-40S.
Synopsis of Rule of Law.
In a products-liability action alleging a design defect, a plaintiff must show that (1) the product was defectively designed so as to render the product unreasonably dangerous, (2) a safer alternative design existed at the time of the incident, and (3) the product’s defect was a producing cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
Facts.
James Boggan and Walter Matak, employees of Gulf Coast Electric, used an AWP-40S aerial work platform manufactured and sold by Genie Industries, Inc. (Genie) (defendant) to perform work.
The 1,000-pound versatile lift contained a platform on which an individual could stand. Signs on the machine and in the user’s, manual warned of the obvious danger that the machine could fall over if its four stabilizers were not deployed at the base of the lift prior to raising the platform.
Boggan retracted the four stabilizers and attempted to move the lift with Matak on the raised platform and the machine fell. Matak suffered massive head injuries and died. Representatives of Walter Matak’s estate (plaintiffs) filed suit against Genie based upon an alleged design defect in the AWP-40S. At trial, the plaintiff presented four alternative designs to the AWP-40S. The jury held for the plaintiffs. The court of appeals affirmed, and the state supreme court granted Genie’s petition for review.
Issue.
Whether a product manufacturer is liable for a design defect if no safer alternative design existed at the time of the incident and the defect at issue did not render the product unreasonably dangerous.
Held.
A product manufacturer is not liable for a design defect unless a safer alternative design existed at the time of the incident and the defect at issue rendered the product unreasonably dangerous in that its risks outweighed its utility.
In a products-liability action alleging a design defect, a plaintiff must show that (1) the product was defectively designed so as to render the product unreasonably dangerous, (2) a safer alternative design existed at the time of the incident, and (3) the product’s defect was a producing cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
The risk of danger from misuse of the lift is so obvious that the evidence does not reflect a single other accident involving a fully extended AWP-40S lift. Because the plaintiffs failed to produce a safer alternative design for the lift and the evidence showed that the product was not unreasonably dangerous, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Discussion.
For a design defect to exist, there must have been a safer alternative design that would have prevented or significantly reduced the risk of Matak’s injury without substantially impairing the product’s utility and that was economically and technologically feasible at the time the product left Genie’s control. At trial, the plaintiffs’ expert presented three alternative designs to the AWP-40S, and the plaintiffs’ counsel presented a fourth alternative.
However, none of the provided alternatives would have reduced the risk of harm to Matak while at the same time maintaining the product’s utility. Moreover, the signs warning of the obvious risk of tip-over of the machine were readily apparent on the lift and in the instruction manual.
A product manufacturer is not liable for a design defect unless a safer alternative design existed at the time of the incident and the defect at issue rendered the product unreasonably dangerous.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). |
Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. |
10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!