BLAW 235: Ch 7 - Strict Liability and Product Liability

What must a plaintiff show to assert a design defect?

1. A reasonable alternative design was available. 2. As a result of the defendant's failure to adopt the alternative design, the product was not reasonably safe.

In a product liability suit based on negligence, what must a plaintiff prove?

1. Cause in fact only after this has been established, the following must be proven: 2. Proximate cause

What is the justification of strict product liability's existence?

1. Consumers should be protected against unsafe products. 2. Manufacturers and distributors should not escape liability for faulty products simply because they are not in privity of contract with the ultimate user of those products. 3. Manufacturers and distributors can better bear the costs associated with injuries caused by their products, because they can ultimately pass the costs on to all consumers in the form of higher prices.

In which areas must manufacturers use due care?

1. Designing the product. 2. Selecting the materials. 3. Using the appropriate production process. 4. Assembling and testing the product. 5. Placing adequate warnings on the label to inform the user of dangers of which an ordinary person might not be aware. 6. Inspecting and testing any purchased components used in the product.

What are the requirements of fraud based liability?

1. Misrepresentation must have been made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the facts 2. misrepresentation must be of a material fact, and 3. the seller must have intended to induce the buyer's reliance on the misrepresentation. Misrepresentation on a label or advertisement is enough to show an intent to induce the reliance of anyone who may use the product. 4. Finally, the buyer must have relied on the misrepresentation.

What is the justification of strict liability applying to product liability?

1. The manufacturer can better bear the cost of injury because it can spread the cost throughout society by increasing the prices of its goods. 2. The manufacturer is making a profit from its activities and therefore should bear the cost of injury as an operating expense.

What must a defendant show to establish assumption of risk as a defense?

1. The plaintiff knew and appreciated the risk created by the product defect. 2. The plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk—by express agreement or by words or conduct—even though it was unreasonable to do so. It is worth noting that some states do not allow the defense of assumption of risk in strict product liability claims.

What is the basis of action for strict liability as stated by the second restatement of torts (section 402A)?

1. The product must be in a defective condition when the defendant sells it. 2. The defendant must normally be engaged in the business of selling (or otherwise distributing) that product. 3. The product must be unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer because of its defective condition (in most states). 4. The plaintiff must incur physical harm to self or property by use or consumption of the product. 5. The defective condition must be the proximate cause of the injury or damage. 6. The goods must not have been substantially changed from the time the product was sold to the time the injury was sustained.

What are the 3 types of product defects?

1. manufacturing defects 2. design defects 3. inadequate warnings.

product misuse

A defense against product liability that may be raised when the plaintiff used a product in a manner not intended by the manufacturer. If the misuse is reasonably foreseeable, the seller will not escape liability unless measures were taken to guard against the harm that could result from the misuse.

market-share liability

A theory under which liability is shared among all firms that manufactured and distributed a particular product during a certain period of time. This theory of liability is used only when the specific source of the harmful product is unidentifiable.

Can injured bystanders sue for strict product liability?

Almost all courts extend the strict liability of manufacturers and other sellers to injured bystanders.

How does strict liability relate to abnormally dangerous activities?

Although there is no fault, there is still responsibility because of the dangerous nature of the undertaking.

statues of repose

Basically, a statute of limitations that is not dependent on the happening of a cause of action. Statutes of repose generally begin to run at an earlier date and run for a longer period of time than statutes of limitations.

How do courts determine if product warnings adequately alert consumers to a product's risks?

Courts apply a "reasonableness" test

knowledgable user defense

If a particular danger should be commonly known by particular users of a product, the manufacturer need not warn these users of the danger.

unreasonably dangerous product

In product liability, a product that is defective to the point of threatening a consumer's health and safety. A product will be considered unreasonably dangerous if it is dangerous beyond the expectation of the ordinary consumer or if a less dangerous alternative was economically feasible for the manufacturer, but the manufacturer failed to produce it.

strict liability (also called liability without fault)

Liability regardless of fault. In tort law, strict liability may be imposed on defendants in cases involving abnormally dangerous activities, dangerous animals, or defective products. A person who engages in certain activities can be held responsible for any harm that results to others, even if the person used the utmost care.

Is privity of contract required for strict liability in product liability?

No

Is privity of contract required for product liability actions based on negligence?

No, it is not required. This means that a person who is injured by a defective product may bring a negligence suit even though he or she was not the one who actually purchased the product.

Inadequate Warnings

Product is defective based on inadequate end-user warnings or instructions. Generally, a seller must also warn consumers of harm that can result from the foreseeable misuse of its product.

Which tort theories is product liability based on?

Product liability may be based on the tort theories of negligence, misrepresentation, strict liability, and breach of warranty.

product liability

The legal liability of manufacturers, sellers, and lessors of goods to consumers, users, and bystanders for injuries or damages that are caused by the goods. Product liability lawsuits also reach across international borders.

What happens when a user or consumer is injured as a result of a manufacturer's or seller's fraudulent misrepresentation?

The manufacturer may be liable on the basis of fraud.

Privity of contract

The relationship that exists between the promisor and the promisee of a contract

Obvious risks

There is no duty to warn about obvious or commonly known risks

What is the statute of limitations for product liability claims?

Usually, the injured party must bring a product liability claim within two to four years. Often this period is tolled until he party suffering an injury has discovered it or should have discovered it.

When can a person sue a manufacturer for negligence?

When a manufacturer fails to exercise "due care" to make a product safe, and a person is injured as a result.

Bailments

When goods are temporarily transferred to another

manufacturing defect

a departure from a product unit's design specifications that results in products that are physically flawed, damaged, or incorrectly assembled. Liability is imposed on the manufacturer regardless of whether the manufacturer's quality control efforts were "reasonable".

design defect

a product with a design defect is made in conformity with the manufacturer's design specifications. Nevertheless, the product results in injury to the user because the design itself was faulty.

What is the origin of strict liability?

an English case decided in 1868. (the reservoir which flooded the mine example)

How is comparative negligence (fault) different from other defenses in strict liability claims?

it does not completely absolve the defendant of liability.

When is the defense of product misuse allowed?

only when the particular use was not foreseeable.

Tolled

suspended

preemption

when government regulations preempt claims for product liability. An injured party may not be able to sue the manufacturer of defective products that are subject to comprehensive federal regulatory schemes.