Zogarts manufactured and sold a practice device for beginning golfers. according to statements on the package, the device was completely safe, and a player could never be struck by the device’s golf ball. hauter was hit by the ball while using the device. he sued zogarts, which denied liability on the ground that the statements were merely matters of opinion, so liability could not be based on them. was this a valid defense? [hauter v. zogarts, 534 p.2d 377 (cal.)]