Question

In Hauter v. Zogarts Hauter received a "Golfing Gizmo" that was made by Zogarts as a present. The device was a golf ball attached to string that a user could hit with club. The box that it came in stated, "completely safe, ball will not hit player." Hauter had read the safety manual and used the product a dozen times when he hit the ball too low and was struck in the head with the ball, causing serious injury. Hauter sued for breach of warranty. Zogarts argued that the photos of the man using it properly were a disclaimer and that it was only "completely safe" when used like the photo. The court held that:
A.Zogarts was not liable because the photo was a disclaimer of the express warranty.
B.Zogarts was not liable because Hauter was not using the product properly.
C.Zogarts was liable because they breached the implied warranty of merchantability because the product could not be used to practice golf safely.
D.Zogarts was liable because they failed to put an age restriction on their product.

Answer

This answer is hidden. It contains 157 characters.