what do you think a jury would do in this case

The court returned the case to the lower court to hold a trial, stating that:
 “(1) death of elderly purchaser from hyperthermia as result of failed air conditioning unit was reasonably foreseeable, permitting claim of consequential damages in action for breach of warranty; (2) manufacturers owed duty of care to purchaser to design and manufacture product that would be reasonably safe for its intended and reasonably foreseeable uses; and (3) whether leaky air conditioning unit that failed to cool on a hot day was dangerous was question for jury.” David B. GARAVALIA, as executor of the Estate of Arvo Lake, a deceased person, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HEAT CONTROLLER, INC.; Addison Products Company, Inc.; O.G.F. Corporation, doing business as Giles Appliance Center; and Odell Giles, individually, Defendants-Appellees. No. 5-89-0749. April 19, 1991.

What do you think a jury would do in this case?

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.