Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 02 Aug 2014, 01:23

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2005
Posts: 280
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [1] , given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a [#permalink] New post 28 Aug 2009, 11:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:36) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 sessions
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a state judge agreed to combine a series of workplace disability cases involving repetitive stress injuries to the hands and wrists. The judge's decision to consolidate into one case hundreds of suits by data entry workers, word processors, newspaper employees, and other workers who use computers is likely to prove detrimental to the computer manufacturing companies being sued, notwithstanding the defense's argument that the cases should not be combined because of the different individuals and workplaces involved.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?

The judge's decision to consolidate the suits implies a commonality among the situations, thereby strengthening the plaintiffs' claim that the manufacturers are liable.
Individual rulings in repetitive injury suits often enable manufacturers to escape liability on technical grounds.
The plaintiffs bringing suit against the computer manufacturers have similar employment histories and used similar equipment at their jobs.
The parties accused of liability in workplace injury cases are more likely to settle if the suits are consolidated into one case.
Because consolidated cases tend to receive more publicity than individual rulings, they often result in further lawsuits against manufacturers.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 909
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 193 [0], given: 18

GMAT Tests User
Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 28 Aug 2009, 19:31
Between B and C. IMO C.
B>> We cannot say for sure that the motive of individual rulings is to escape liability.
C>> If plaintiffs are already having problems because they used such equipments in the past then this will be "detrimental" for the computer manufacturers as it will allow the plaintiffs to sue.

OA pls?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 42
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 5

Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 29 Aug 2009, 09:19
IMO A
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Posts: 331
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2009, 08:15
I'm confused with this one , still went for C
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Posts: 177
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 13

Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2009, 10:49
netcaesar wrote:
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a state judge agreed to combine a series of workplace disability cases involving repetitive stress injuries to the hands and wrists. The judge's decision to consolidate into one case hundreds of suits by data entry workers, word processors, newspaper employees, and other workers who use computers is likely to prove detrimental to the computer manufacturing companies being sued, notwithstanding the defense's argument that the cases should not be combined because of the different individuals and workplaces involved.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?

The judge's decision to consolidate the suits implies a commonality among the situations, thereby strengthening the plaintiffs' claim that the manufacturers are liable.
Individual rulings in repetitive injury suits often enable manufacturers to escape liability on technical grounds.
The plaintiffs bringing suit against the computer manufacturers have similar employment histories and used similar equipment at their jobs.
The parties accused of liability in workplace injury cases are more likely to settle if the suits are consolidated into one case.
Because consolidated cases tend to receive more publicity than individual rulings, they often result in further lawsuits against manufacturers.


I think the answer is A

A - The judge is combining the cases so must have commonality and obviously the plaintiff (manufacturers) does not like this

B - Can't assume the outcome of the case based on info

C- Can't say. Computer manufacturers are arguing they are saying they are different.

D - Too much to assume here

E - Don't know if they receive more publicity based on the argument above.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 119
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 2

Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2009, 15:25
netcaesar wrote:
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a state judge agreed to combine a series of workplace disability cases involving repetitive stress injuries to the hands and wrists. The judge's decision to consolidate into one case hundreds of suits by data entry workers, word processors, newspaper employees, and other workers who use computers is likely to prove detrimental to the computer manufacturing companies being sued, notwithstanding the defense's argument that the cases should not be combined because of the different individuals and workplaces involved.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?

The judge's decision to consolidate the suits implies a commonality among the situations, thereby strengthening the plaintiffs' claim that the manufacturers are liable.
Individual rulings in repetitive injury suits often enable manufacturers to escape liability on technical grounds.
The plaintiffs bringing suit against the computer manufacturers have similar employment histories and used similar equipment at their jobs.
The parties accused of liability in workplace injury cases are more likely to settle if the suits are consolidated into one case.
Because consolidated cases tend to receive more publicity than individual rulings, they often result in further lawsuits against manufacturers.


In my opinion, answer is A.
Going back to the question stem, "The judge's decision to consolidate into one case hundreds of suits ... is LIKELY TO PROVE detrimental to the computer manufacturing companies." I think this provides us a clue as to what the conclusion is. PROVE HOW?
A. Prove how? By consolidating the commonality among the situations hence strengthening the claim against manufacturers
B cites a possible conclusion, not yet conclusive
C provides data/detail of the nature/history of the parties involved
D and E are both assumptions

What's the OA?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 341
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2009, 17:40
I will go with C , confuesed between A and C , OA pls?
_________________

Always tag your question

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2005
Posts: 280
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c [#permalink] New post 31 Aug 2009, 12:42
OA is A
Re: Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure c   [#permalink] 31 Aug 2009, 12:42
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a netcaesar 4 28 Aug 2009, 11:00
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause for SimaQ 6 18 Nov 2006, 08:57
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of coffeeloverfreak 11 19 Sep 2005, 19:04
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of okdongdong 9 11 Aug 2005, 06:15
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of chunjuwu 10 19 Feb 2005, 23:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.