Torts: Strict Liability/products Liability

Front 1

Strict Liability Elements:

Back 1

For strict liability Plaintiff must show that the nature of the defendant's activity imposes an absolutel duty to make safe, the dangerous aspect of the activity was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury and the plaintiff suffered damage to person or property

Front 2

Strict liability for wild animals

Back 2

An owner is strictly liable to licensees and invitees for injuries caused by wild animals (even those kept as pets)

Front 3

Strict liability for Domestic animals

Back 3

An owner is not strictly liable for injuries caused by domestic animals unless he has knowledge of that particular animals dangerous propensities not common to the species.

Front 4

Strict liability: Trespassers

Back 4

Will not be imposed in favor of trespassers w/o negligence of the owner. A landlord may be liable on intentional tort grounds for injuries inflicted by vicious watchdogs.

Front 5

Strict Liability: Abnormally Dangerous Activities

Back 5

Ryland v. Fletcher: An activity is abnormally dangerous when the activity crease a foreseeable risk of serious harm even hwhen reaosnable care is exercised by all actors and the acitivty is not a matter of common usage in the community.

Front 6

Strict Liability: Contributory Negligence

Back 6

Contributory negligence is no defense unless Plaintiff knew of the danger and his unreasonable conduct was the cause of the harm from the wild animal or abnormally dangerous activity.

Front 7

Strict Liability: Assumption of the risk

Back 7

Assumption of the risk is a good defense: Use it if you can.

Front 8

Strict Liability: Comparative Negligence

Back 8

Most comparative negligence states apply their rules to strict liability.

Front 9

Products Liability: Elements

Back 9

Defendant was a merchant, must show product was defective, the product has not been altered since it left D's hands, and P was making a foreseeable use of the product at the time of the injury. (privity not required)

Front 10

Products Liability: Types of Defects

Back 10

Manufacturing defect, Design defect, inadequate warnings

Front 11

Products Liability: Manufacturing Defect

Back 11

When product differs from all other products that came off the assembly line in a way that makes it more dangerous than P would expect (Consumer Expectation Test)

Front 12

Products Liability: Design Defects

Back 12

When all products of a line are the same but have dangerous propensities. Plaintiff must show that there was a reasonable alternative design.

Front 13

Products Liability: Reasonable Alternaitve Design

Back 13

The design was safer than the version marketed, and does not seriously impact the product's price or utility

Front 14

Products Liability: Government safety standards

Back 14

A product's noncompliance establishes that is was defective. A product's compliance is evidence, but not conclusive that the product was defective.

Front 15

Products liability: Inadequate Warnings

Back 15

A product has an inadequate warning if it fails to warn of the risks involved in using the product that may not be apparent to users. Prescription drugs and medical devices, warnings are given to learned intermediaries.

Front 16

Products Liability: Unavoidably Unsafe Products

Back 16

Manufacturers will not be held liable for some dangerous product if the danger is apparent and there is no safer way to make the product

Front 17

Products Liability: Defenses

Back 17

Comparative Fault

Front 18

Products Liability: Damages:

Back 18

Compensatory, and punitives

Front 19

Products Liability Theories

Back 19

Intent: Not very common. Negligence: Duty: any foreseeable Plaintiff: Privity is not required so users, consumers and bystanders can sue. Breach shown by negligent conduct of D leading to the supplying of a defective product. Can be satisfied through cursory inspection.

Front 20

Products Liabiltiy Theories Strict PL

Back 20

Elements: a strict duty owed by a commercial supplier of a product; production or sale of a defective product, actual and proximate cause and damages

Front 21

Products Liability: Strict PL

Back 21

For liabiltiy to attach, product must reach Plaintiff without substantial alteration. Does not extend to services. Casual sellers not liable.

Front 22

Strict Products Liability

Back 22

To prevail on a strict products liability action, Sally must prove the following elements 1) Strict duty owed by a commercial supplier 2) breach of duty 3) actual and proximate cause 4) damages

Front 23

Strict Products Liabiltiy: Commercial Supplier

Back 23

owes a strict duty to users, consumers and bystanders.

Front 24

Strict Products Liability: Breach of Duty

Back 24

Must show that the product was defective when it left D's control (manufacturing defect, design defect, inadequate warnings)

Front 25

Strict Products Liabilty: Actual Causation

Back 25

Plaintiff must trace the harm suffered to a defect in the product that existed when it left Defendant's control.

Front 26

Strict Product Liability: Inadequate warning Defenses

Back 26

Ordinary contributory negligence is not a defense where Plaintiff fails to discover the defect or guard against its existence