Because of Farmer's default on his loan, the bank foreclosed on the farm and equipment that secured the loan. Among the items sold at the resulting auction was a new tractor recently delivered to Farmer by the retailer. Shortly after purchasing the tractor at the auction, Pratt was negligently operating the tractor on a hill when it rolled over due to a defect in the tractor's design. He was injured as a result. Pratt sued the auctioneer, alleging strict liability in tort. The jurisdiction has not adopted a comparative fault rule in strict liability cases. In this suit, the result should be for the 
plaintiff, because the defendant sold a defective product that injured the plaintiff.  plaintiff, if the defendant failed to inspect the tractor for defects prior to sale.  defendant, because he should not be considered a "seller" for purposes of strict liability in tort.  defendant, because the accident was caused in part by Pratt's negligence. 
Question: Because of Farmer's default on his loan, the bank foreclosed on the farm and equipment that secured the loan. Among the items sold at the resulting auction was a new tractor recently delivered to Farmer by the retailer. Shortly after purchasing the tractor at the auction, Pratt was negligently operating the tractor on a hill when it rolled over due to a defect in the tractor's design. He was injured as a result. Pratt sued the auctioneer, alleging strict liability in tort. The jurisdiction has not adopted a comparative fault rule in strict liability cases. In this suit, the result should be for the 
A. plaintiff, because the defendant sold a defective product that injured the plaintiff. 
B. plaintiff, if the defendant failed to inspect the tractor for defects prior to sale. 
C. defendant, because he should not be considered a "seller" for purposes of strict liability in tort. 
D. defendant, because the accident was caused in part by Pratt's negligence. 
Answer: