Merv Grazinski, driving his Winnebago, put it on cruise control to go make coffee. The Winnebago went off the road, turned over several times, and left Grazinski paralyzed from the waist down. He brings a product liability lawsuit against Winnebago. Which of the following is the best possible defense for Winnebago to use at trial?O Res ipsa loquiturO Contributory negligenceO Assumption of riskO Proximate cause

Contributory negligence principle demonstrates failure of an injured party to act prudently, considered to be a contributory factor in the injury which they have suffered.

In this case this is the best possible defense that Winnebago is able to provide that the injured party has failed to act prudently that is used as a contributory factor for the injury they suffered.

Why other options are incorrect?

Res ipsa loquitur

It is the principle that the mere occurrence of some types of accident is sufficient to imply negligence. In this case, Winnebago cruise control is not enough to imply negligence.

Assumption of risk

Assumption of risk refers to a legal doctrine under which an individual is barred from recovering damages for an injury sustained when he or she voluntarily exposed him or herself to a known danger.

Proximate cause:

In law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to an injury that the courts deem the event to be the cause of that injury