Ronald Metzger placed his fifteen-month old son John, awake and healthy, in his playpen. Ronald left the room for five minutes and on his return found John lifeless. A purple toy block had lodged in the boy’s throat, choking him to death. Ronald called 911, but efforts to revive John were to no avail. There was no warning of a choking hazard on the box containing the block. John’s parents sued Playskool, Inc. Playskool filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the danger of a young child choking on a small block was obvious. Assume you were the judge in the trial court hearing this case and answer the following questions: a. Is the question of whether a child could choke on one of the small blocks a question of fact or a question of law? Explain your choice. b. Should you grant Playskool’s request for summary judgment? Why or why not? Explain. c. Suppose that Matthew had not choked on the block but his father, concerned that Matthew could have choked on the block, filed a lawsuit against Playskool anyway. In the suit, the father asked the court to order Playskool to place a warning on the box as to the choking hazard so that other consumers would not be harmed. In this situation, would the father have standing to sue? Explain.