human
Question: Park sued Davis Co. for injuries suffered in the crash of Park's dune buggy, allegedly caused by a defective auto part manufactured by Davis Co. Davis Co. claims that the part was a fraudulent imitation, not produced by Davis Co. Which of the following is NOT admissible on the issue of whether the part was manufactured by Davis Co.?

Choices:
A) The fact that the defective part bears Davis Co.'s insignia or trademark.
B) Testimony that the part was purchased from a parts house to which Davis Co. regularly sold parts.
C) The part itself and a concededly genuine part manufactured by Davis Co. (for the jury's comparison).
D) A judgment for another plaintiff against Davis Co. in another case involving substantially similar facts.
gpt
The correct answer is 3: A judgment for another plaintiff against Davis Co. in another case involving substantially similar facts..