In my opinion, in this case Cedars-Sinai Medical center wins. Because the installation of the pace maker was a service provided by the medical center. The pacemaker was manufactured by American Technology Inc, hence this company should be held liable for any defect in its product. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center was not involved in either manufacturing or selling or distributing or testing of the pacemaker. So it is not liable for any injury caused to Frances Hector.
Under the uniform commercial code article 2 is entitled sales. Section 2-102 states that its coverage applies to transaction of goods. Some transaction involves combination of sales and service which are called mixed sales. In this case the transaction between Frances Hector and Cedar-Sinai
Under the uniform commercial code article 2 is entitled sales. Section 2-102 states that its coverage applies to transaction of goods. Some transaction involves combination of sales and service which are called mixed sales. In this case the transaction between Frances Hector and Cedar-Sinai