Chapter 7: Strict Liability and Product Liability

Crashworthiness Doctrine

Automobile manufacturers are under a duty to design the vehicle's interior so that it anticipates the possibility of harm from a body striking something inside the vehicle in an accident

Strict Product Liability and Public Policy

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

Other Product Defects

Failure to provide adequate instructions Inadequate testing of products Inadequate selection of component parts and materials Improper certification of the safety of a product

Comparative Negligence

Fault A defendant may be able to limit some of its liability if it can show that the plaintiff's misuse of the product contributed to his or her injuries Does not completely absolve the defendant of liability, but it can reduce the total amount of damages that will be awarded to the plaintiff

Unforeseeable misuse of the product

o Product Misuse When a product is used for a purpose for which it was not intended

Commonly known dangers

o Products that are so commonly known as being dangerous (sharp knives and matches) don't need to warn the users of danger o Knowledgeable User

Assumption of Risk

o The plaintiff knew and appreciated the risk created by the product defect o The plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk - by express agreement or by words or conduct - even though it was unreasonable to do so

o Statutes of limitations

restrict the time within which an action many be brought. The statute of limitations for product liability cases varies according to state law • Injured party must bring a product liability claim within 2 to 4 years Often the running of the prescribed period is tolled (that is, suspended) until the party suffering an injury has discovered it or should have discovered it

Defective Warning

A defect can occur when a manufacturer doesn't place an appropriate warning on the packaging of a product when that product could cause injury if the danger is unknown

Strict Liability

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

Abnormal Dangerous Activities

Activities with high risk of serious harm to persons or property

Other applications of Strict Product Liability

Almost all courts extend the strict liability of manufactures and others sellers to injured bystanders

Defense to Product Liability

Generally known dangers Gov. Contractor defense Supervening or intervening event Assumption of risk Unforeseeable misuse of the product Commonly known dangers Statutes of limitation and statutes of repose Contributory/comparative negligence

Manufacturing Defects

Manufacturer's own standards of quality will label this a defective product. Manufacturer may fail to properly assemble, test or check the quality of this product

Market-Share Liability

Ordinarily, in all product liability claims, a plaintiff must prove that the defective product that cause his or her injury was the product of a specific defendant In few situations, however, courts have dropped requirement when plaintiffs couldn't prove which of many distributors of a harmful product supplied the particular product that caused the injuries A court can hold each manufacturer responsible for a percentage of the plaintiff's damages that is equal to the percentage of its market share

Strict Product Liability

People must be liable for the results of their acts regardless of their intentions or their exercise of reasonable care Liability does not depend on privity of contact o The injured party doesn't have to be the buyer

Strict Liability in Tort

Strict liability is imposed irrespective of fault. Originally imposed for abnormally dangerous activity. Now, a defective product, unreasonably dangerous to the user All parties in the chain of distribution are strictly liable. No contractual relationship [privity] is required

Strict Liability and Products Liability

The liability of suppliers, manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, retailers and other sellers for the injuries caused by defective products

Applications of Strict Liabilities

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

Requirements for Strict Product Liability

The product must be in a defective condition when the defendant sells it The defendant must normally be engaged in the business of selling (or otherwise distributing) that product The product must be unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer because of its defective condition (in most states) o Unreasonably dangerous products: The product was dangerous beyond the expectation of the ordinary consumer A less dangerous alternative was economically feasible for the manufacturer, but the manufacturer failed to produce it The plaintiff must incur physical harm to self or property by use or consumption of the product The defective condition must be the proximate cause of the injury or damage The goods must have been substantially changed from the time the product was sold to the time the injury was sustained

Defect in Packaging

This defect occurs when a product's package is insufficiently tamperproof

Design Defects

This defect occurs when an entire product line is improperly designed Lf = PG / C L = Liability, P = Probability, G = Gravity of harm, C = cost of a safe alternative design

Product Liability

Those who make, sell, or lease goods can be held liable for physical harm or property damage caused by those goods to a consumer, user, or bystander Negligence o A tort where a defective product breaching a duty of due care and causing harm to a plaintiff Manufactures must use due care in all the following areas: • Designing the product • Selecting the materials • Using the appropriate production process • Assembling and testing the product • Placing adequate warnings on the label to inform the user of dangers of which an ordinary person might not be aware • Inspecting and testing any purchased components used in their product Misrepresentation o A tort where a seller has fraudulently misrepresented the quality of a product and the seller causing harm to a plaintiff Strict Liability Warranties

Statutes of Response

To ensure that sellers and manufacturers will not be left vulnerable to lawsuits indefinitely, many states have passed statutes of repose Which place outer time limits on product liability actions For instance, a statute of repose may require that claims be brought within twelve years from the date of sale or manufacturer of the defective product. If the plaintiff doesn't bring an action before the prescribed period expires,, the seller cannot be held liable

Manufacturing Defects

o A departure form a product unit's design specifications that results in products that are physically flawed, damaged, or incorrectly assembled o Quality control When a manufacturer fails to assemble, test, or adequately check the quality of a product Liability is imposed on the manufacturer regardless of whether the manufacturer's quality control efforts were "reasonable" o Expert testimony Cases involving allegations of a manufacturing defect are often decided based on the opinions and testimony of experts

Inadequate Warnings

o A product may also be deemed defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings. o Content to warning Important factors for a court to consider: • Risks of a product • Content and comprhensibiilty • Intensity of expression of warnings and instructions • The characteristics of expected user groups • Reasonableness test An action alleging that a product is defective due to an inadequate label can be based on state law o Obvious Risk There is no duty to warn about risks that are obvious or commonly known. Warnings about such risk do not add to the safety of a product and could even detract from it by making other warnings seem less significant o Foreseeable Misuses Generally, a seller must warn those who purchase its product of the harm that can result from the foreseeable misuse of the product as well. Sellers are not required to take precautions against every conceivable misuse of a product, just those that are foreseeable

Design Defects

o Made in conformity with the manufacturer's design specifications. The product results in injury to the user because the design itself was faulty. o To successfully assert a design defect, a plaintiff has to show that: A reasonable alternative design was available The defendant's failure to adopt the alternative design rendered the product not reasonably safe o Risky-Utility Analysis Most courts engage in a risk-utility analysis to determine whether the risk of harm from the product as designed outweighs its utility tot the user and to the public o Consumer-Expectation Test Determines whether a product's design was defective Under this test, a product is unreasonably dangerous when it fails to perform in the manner that would reasonably be expected by an ordinary customer