Transcript Power Point Chapter Six

Strict Liability
Chapter 6
Strict Liability
• Do we care who is at fault?
• Hypo:
– I decide to build a new garage. I use
dynamite to breakup my cement garage floor.
I use more care than the reasonable person.
However, the dynamite sends cement flying
across my lot and it smashes my neighbors
car window. Am I negligent?
– Would I be held liable under strict liability?
Abnormally Dangerous Activities
• Abnormally dangerous activity is an
activity that
– 1) involves potentially serious harm to people
or property
– 2) involves a high degree of risk that cannot
be eliminated by reasonable care
– 3) is not normally performed in surrounding
area
Product Liability
Oh – I found a syringe in my Pepsi!
• Product liability covers negligence
– Manufacturers must exercise due care when
manufacturing else its negligence
• Covers
– Warning labels
– Testing
– Inspection
– Assembly
Negligent Manufacturing
• Jane opens a can of soda and acids
shoots out and hits her in the fact. The
acid causes 3rd degree burns. Can she
recover under negligence theory?
• What if instead of hitting Jane, the soda
hits a passerby on the street. Can the
passerby recover?
– Does it matter that Jane bought the soda?
Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Seller conceals a defect with a product
– Must be made knowingly or recklessly
– Injury must result if damages are to be
awarded
• Nonfraudulent misrepresentation occurs
when a merchant innocently
misrepresents a product
• Both fraudulent and nonfraudulent require
the misrepresentation of a material fact
Strict Product Liability
• Not available in Virginia or Massachusetts
– First adopted by California
• What is the policy behind strict liability?
Requirements for Strict Liability
• Six Requirements
– 1) product must be in a defective state when sold
– 2) defendant must engaged in selling or distributing
the product
– 3) the product must be unreasonably dangerous to
the user because of the defect
– 4) the plaintiff must incur harm to self or property
– 5) 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
Unreasonably Dangerous Products
• Plaintiff must show the product was
unreasonably dangerous not how it got that way
• Plaintiff must also show the product was
unreasonably dangerous when it left the
manufacturers hands
• Unreasonably dangerous either
– It was dangerous beyond the expectation of the
average manufacturer
– A less dangerous alternative was economically
available
Product Defects
• Manufacturing defects occur when product
departs from intended use
– Liability imposed on manufacturer, wholesaler,
and retailer
• Design defects occur when dangerous
attribute could have been avoided by
alternative design
– Alternative design must have been
reasonable
More Product Defects
• Warning defects occur when product contains
inadequate warnings or instructions
– Must take care to warn of foreseeable risks
– Courts look at
• Intended user groups
• Risk of product
• Content
– No need to warn of obvious risks
• May detract from needed warnings
– Foreseeable risks
• See case on page 132 and 133
Market Share Liability
• Hypo: A child eats lead paint and
becomes ill. Who should the parent sue?
How do you know who manufactured the
paint?
• Market share liability imposes liability on
all manufactures during the relevant time
period in proportion to market share
Defenses to Strict Liability
• Assumption of risk
– Plaintiff knew of risk
– & voluntarily accepted risk
• Product Misuse
– Manufacturer should guard against obvious
misuses
• Commonly known dangers
• Statute of Limitations