Legal Studies Chapter 9
duties include
1. General obligations to act in a reasonable manner so as not to put another in harm's way 2. Special duties to certain parties, including the duty to inspect or the duty to warn of defects 3. And assumption of duty
In a products liability case, the injured party may pursue a legal remedy against the seller under one of three theories:
1. Negligence 2. Warranty 3. or strict liability
assumption of risk requirements
1. The injured party/plaintiff knows or should know that a risk of harm is inherent in the activity 2. And the injured party/plaintiff voluntarily participates in the activity
In cases of fraudulent misrepresentation, the law allows the innocent party to recover if
1. The misrepresentation was a material fact known to be false by the tortfeasor 2. The tortfeasor intended to persuade the innocent party to rely on the statement, and the innocent party did, in fact, rely on it 3. And damages were suffered by the innocent party
requirement for statement to be considered defamatory
A false statement concerning a party's reputation or honesty or a statement that subjects a party to hate, contempt, or ridicule, must be provable as false and cannot be pure opinion
trepass to land
A person without permission or legal authorization enters the land and actual harm is not required
Contributory Negligence defense
A rule in tort law, used in only a few states, that completely bars the plaintiff from recovering any damages if the damage suffered is partly the plaintiff's own fault.
negligence per se (violation of safety statutes) statute requirements
A statute must clearly set out: The standard of conduct, When and where the conduct is expected, Of whom the conduct is expected
business special relationship
Businesses have a special relationship with their visitors and patrons that would allow recovery even in a case of nonfeasance
inadequate warning
Failure to warn may render the product unreasonably dangerous even absent any manufacturing or design defect
substantial change defense
For strict liability to apply, the product must reach the end user without substantial change
fair report
If one relies on an official public document or a statement made by a public official and cites the document or public statement when making an allegedly defamatory statement
truth defense to defamation
If the statement made is truthful, no defamation has occurred
public figure standard
If the victim is a public figure the defamation must have been committed with malice or reckless disregard for the truth
trade libel
In cases where a competitor has made a false statement that disparages a competing product, an injured party may sue for trade libel
comparative negligence defense
In cases where the injured party's conduct has played a factor in the harm suffered, jury allocates the proportion of negligence committed by each party in terms of the percentage
what constitutes negligent design?
Inherently dangerous, Contains insufficient safety devices, Consists of materials that do not satisfy standards in the trade
false imprisonment
Intentional confinement or restraint of another without justification
what must be proved in strict liability cases
Once it has been established that the product is unreasonably dangerous, the injured party must prove only that the defective product was the cause of the injuries and that the product caused an actual injury that resulted in damages
conversion
Permanent removal of property from the rightful owner
invasion of property
Public disclosure of private facts
unavoidably unsafe
Some products are designed and manufactured correctly, and adequate warning has been given, but the product is still dangerous
requirement to use qualified privilege
The defendant must offer evidence of good faith and be absent of malice to be shielded from liability
requirements of proximate cause
The injured party must also prove that 1. The tortfeasor's conduct was also the closest-in-proximity cause of the damages 2. And the tortfeasor's liability wasn't canceled due to a superseding cause
trepass to personal property
The intent is not to keep the property, but rather use the property for a period of time and generally no harm is intended to the property
duty
The law imposes a general duty on all parties to act reasonably and not to impart unreasonable risk to other
when is liability under 402 triggered?
The seller is engaged in the business of selling such a product And the production is expected to and does reach the user or consumer without a substantial change in the condition in which it is sold
res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself)
This doctrine allows an injured party to create a presumption that the tortfeasor was negligent by pointing to certain facts that infer negligent conduct without showing exactly how the tortfeasor behaved
assumption of the risk defense
When the injured party knows that a substantial and apparent risk is associated with certain conduct and the party goes ahead with the dangerous activity anyway,
tort
a civil wrong where one party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another part
types of privilege defenses
absolute and qualified
negligence
an accidental (without willful intent) event that causes harm to another party
strict liability
applies primarily in cases of defective products and abnormally dangerous activities; tortfeasor may be held liable for an act regardless of intent or willfulness
examples of intentional torts
battery, assault, trespass, conversion
cause in fact
but for the breach of duty by the tortfeasor, would the injured party have suffered damages?
express warranty claim
can take several different forms, whether spoken or written, and is basically a guarantee that the product will meet a certain level of quality and reliability
two primary defenses to claims of negligence
comparative negligence and assumption of risk
battery
completion of the assault i.e. physical contact
elements of intentional interference with a contract
contract between A and B, C knows about contract, C intentionally induces party to A to breach contract with B, B sustains damages
determining the scope of risk for closest in proximity
courts favor using foreseeability to define the scope of the risk
implied warranty claim
covers most consumer purchases, there is an implied warranty of merchantability, which means it is guaranteed to work as claimed
theories of unreasonably dangerous defects
design or manufacturing defect, inadequate warning, improper packaging, unavoidably unsafe
elements of negligence
duty, breach of duty, cause in fact, proximate cause, actual damages
negligence in products liability
failure to warn, negligent design, negligent manufacture, negligent testing or failure to test, negligent advertising
elements of product disparagement
false statement about plaintiff's business, product, or service, published statement, harm to reputation, actual economic loss
three types of absolute privilege
government officials, judicial officers/proceedings, state legislators
dram shop law
impose liability on the owners and employees of a public establishment where alcohol is being served
402A of the restatement of torts
imposes strict liability on the seller so long as the injured party can show that the product was in a defective condition and that the defect rendered the product unreasonable dangerous
estate
in addition to land, assets, and personal property, a person's estate also consists of legal rights and entitlements after death, including the right to sue for the tortious conduct that causes the death
fraudulent mispresentation as a tort
in cases where the law provides a remedy to recover damages when the innocent party suffers a pecuniary loss as a result of the false representation
qualified privileges grounded in public policy
individuals reporting crime, media, fair report privilege, employer references
recovery regarding duty
injured parties may generally recover for misfeasance but not for nonfeasance unless the parties have a special relationship
willful conduct
intentional behavior directed by the will
common intentional torts in business
intentional interference with a contract, trade libel, product disparagement
three categories of torts
intentional, negligence, strict liability
Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1966
internet service providers were to be treated as newsstand-like distributors, protected from defamation liability
superseding cause in proximate cause
intervening act may also contribute to the negligence by producing additional damages to the injured party after the tortfeasor's negligent act
defective condition reasonable expectations test
is the defect beyond the expectations of the average consumer?
product liability laws
laws that cover individuals who are injured by a product and may take the form of state common law or state statutes that expressly impose liability for injuries that result from products
written defamation
libel
merchants defense for false imprisonment
limited detention, limited to premises, seizure of stolen property in plain view but not search, no coercion
pecuniary harm
lost revenue or profits, both actual and potential
state of the art defense in product liability cases
manufacturer could not have known of danger or hazard by using the scientific or technical knowledge available at the time the product was made or sold
punitive damage
monetary damages, generally a multiple of the actual damages, that are awarded partly to punish the tortfeasor and partly to deter others from acting in a similar manner
in negligence per se (violation of safety statutes) what must the plaintiff prove?
must demonstrate that the statute is designed to prevent The injury suffered and The plaintiff falls within the class of people the statute protects
intentional tort
one in which the tortfeasor is willful in bringing about a particular event that causes harm to another party
tortfeasor
one who commits a tort
macpherson rule
one who negligently manufacturers a product is liable for any injuries to personal proximately caused by the negligence (not just the purchaser of the product)
Landowner Duty
owe a general duty to parties off the land from any unreasonable risks to them caused by something on the land
consumer fraud protection act
punish those who commit fraud and allow victims of fraud to sue and collect treble damages
privilege defense to defamation
recognizes either a legal or public or policy-based immunity from a defamation claim
products liability
refers to the liability of any seller of a product that, because of a defect, causes harm to a consumer
oral defamation
slander
misfeasance
some act by one party that harms or endangers another party
source of tort law
state common law principles
4 elements of defamation
statement is defamatory, statement communicated to a third party, statement is specific, statement causes injury/damages
elements of trade libel
statement makes a clear and specific reference to the product, constitutes false or reckless disregard for the truth, communicated to a third party, actual economic loss as a result
sellers defenses in strict liability cases for products liability
substantial change, assumption of the risk, misuse of the product, state of the art
Defamation
the action of damaging the good reputation of someone; slander or libel.
nonfeasance
the failure to act or intervene in a certain situation
malice
the intent, without justification or excuse, to commit a wrongful act or inflict harm
defective condition risk/utility test
the magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product
defamation on the internet
the publisher could be held liable for defamatory statements but the distributor could not
assault
the reasonable fear of immediate harmful contact
induce
to bring about or give rise to, liability is triggered if interference causes the harm
purpose of tort law
to compensate injured parties for losses resulting in harm from some unreasonable conduct by another
defenses to defamation
truth and privilege
determining breach of duty
use reasonable person standard
assumption of risk defense in product liability cases
used narrowly, If a consumer is made fully aware of a product recall due to a design or manufacturing defect but continues to use the product
strict liability for products liability
when an article the manufacturer places on the market, knowing that it is to be used without inspection for defects, proves to have a defect that causes injury to a human being
design defect
when foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by some alternative design
assumption of duty
when one party voluntarily begins to render assistance even when there is no legal obligation to do so, party must proceed with reasonable care or be held liable
misuse of product defense in product liability cases
when the particular use of the product is so far from its ordinary use that it is not reasonably foreseeable by the selle
two types of intentional torts
wrongs against persons and wrongs against property