Whether the seller of an automated external defibrillator("AED") owes or retains a duty to a third party allegedly injured by failure of the owner to implement the AED under the circumstances of this case.

Whether the contract of sale of the AED at issue creates a certain obligation on the seller to provide the owner's employees with proper training to recognize and respond to situations in which an AED may be used.

Whether a user of the owner's premises constitutes a third-party beneficiary of an alleged contract between a seller and an owner of an AED requiring the seller to provide training to the owner's employees to recognize and respond to situations in which an AED may be used.

Whether a duty to a third party arises out of the contract from an alleged failure of a seller to provide such training.

Whether the Court should adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Phys. & Emotional Harm § 40.

The audio of the oral argument in this game will be made available after September 22, 2016.

SAVE MONEY: Use the prepaid CLE credits that come with your TBA Complete Membership and take this course for free. Not a TBA member? Join now to start saving.