Between 1997 and 2005, Graynold Motors sold cars with a certain defect.
One in 2,500 former Graynold car owners suffered injury or property damage during the years Graynolds were sold with that particular defect.
Attorneys representing former Graynold automobile owners filed a lawsuit against Graynold, claiming
that Graynold must have known about the defect, and
that Graynold should be liable for the injuries and property damage before the defect was announced.
The answer to each of the following questions would be helpful in
evaluating the attorneys’ claim EXCEPT:
A) What is the typical rate of injury or property damage among owners of cars other than Graynolds?............
if there is any damage due to external factors such as weather conditions or calamities, that helps to know the cause behind the damage.B) What was the rate of injury or property damage among owners of Graynolds before this particular defect?.............
if the rate of injury among owners of Graynolds before this defect is known then we can estimate damage due to this defective product alone by removing original damage for consideration.C) Have the defective Graynold automobiles negatively impacted the network of independent auto mechanics that specialize in repairing Graynolds?...............
defects can increase repairs thereby benefiting them and even if not this is help us verify car owners claimD)Can normal automobile wear and tear cause the same general outcome as that associated with the defect?............
if yes then no special damage occurred because of defect. If no car owners claim seems to justify.E) What fraction of the injuries and property damage is associated with the particular defect in question?
This can help us to understand the problem.Biggest aspect to be considered................this is an EXCEPT questionWe have 4 heros 1 villain............................we like baddie Damon Salvatore here.