16) Strict Products Liability

Question 1

focus on

Answer 1

condition of product that D put into the market

Question 2

SPL: elements

Answer 2

1) proper P
2) proper D
3) proper context
4) defect
5) cause in fact
6) proximate cause
7) damages
8) SPL defenses

Question 3

proper P: def

Answer 3

any P who is a user, consumer, or bystander injured while using a defective product may recover damages from an appropriate D

privity of k not required – dnn to be purchaser

Question 4

proper D: def

Answer 4

commercial suppliers at all levels of the distribution chain and those in the market of selling the product

Question 5

proper Ds: yes

Answer 5

manufacturers
wholesaler
retailer

Question 6

NOT proper D

Answer 6

1) occasional / 1x seller

2) ppl supplying services (ex. optometrist)

Question 7

proper context: def

Answer 7

not services – need a product

Question 8

proper context: hybrid case

Answer 8

which predominates, goods or services?

if product: yes SPL

if services, and product merely incidental, then no SPL

Question 9

proper context: hybrid case: perm case

Answer 9

the product predominated

Question 10

defect: general def/rule

Answer 10

liability wher eproduct is in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous

Question 11

defects: kinds

Answer 11

1) manufacturing
2) design
3) warnings

Question 12

manufacturing defect: def

Answer 12

product manufactured in form not intended by the manufacturer and defect existed at time it left D’s hands

Question 13

design defect: def

Answer 13

product was manufactured as manufacturer intended, BUT still presents danger of PI or property damage to P

Question 14

design defect: tests

Answer 14

1) ordinary consumer expectation

2) risk-utility balancing

Question 15

design defect: ordinary consumer expectation: test

Answer 15

a product is defective when it is more dangerous than would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, w the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its chs

Question 16

design defect: risk-utility balancing test

Answer 16

product is defective if jury determines that the danger it threatens (cost in human injury + property damage) outweighs its utility to society

balance:
likelihood / nature / potential severity of injuries

vs

usefulness
consider availability, cost, impact of safer alternative designs

Question 17

“state of the art”

Answer 17

no safer alternative designs exist

Question 18

risk-utility balancing test – when is the product defective?

Answer 18

if an alternative design could have reduced the danger at about the same cost

Question 19

defective design: exceptions

Answer 19

extraordinary social utility + no alternative design

Question 20

defective design: exception: results

Answer 20

can’t be found defective design (but could still find manufacturing defect or warning defect)

Question 21

defective design: exceptions: examples

Answer 21

vaccines
rx drugs
med devices

Question 22

defective warning: kinds

Answer 22

1) inadequate warning

2) failure to warn

Question 23

inadequate warning: test

Answer 23

does the warning reasonably inform the foreseeable user of significant risks?

Question 24

inadequate warning: factors to consider

Answer 24

language
placement
font size
who’s foreseeable user?

Question 25

failure to warn: test

Answer 25

manufacturer has to warn about significant risks of which it knows or shoudl hav eknown

consider: gravity + probability of harm

Question 26

warnings: liability in the chain

Answer 26

yes! still SPL so ok if the retailer who didn’t put the warning on there can make the claim

Question 27

SPL: cause in fact

Answer 27

same (MLTN that but-for or SF)

general rule: usually prove causation by showing the defect that injured P was in existence at the tie it left D’s control

Question 28

SPL: proximate cause

Answer 28

same rule – look for intervening forces that are highly culpable, highly unforeseeable, and therefore superceding

Question 29

SPL: proximate cause: example

Answer 29

sometimes someone lower down the chain can be a superceding cause (like parents allowing kid to access rat poison)

Question 30

SPL: PC: learned intermediary doctrine: rule

Answer 30

if manufacturer provides warning to a dr, can expect that dr will pass it on to pt. If dr does not, then dr is the superseding cause

Question 31

SPL: damages: rule

Answer 31

only recoverable when:

1) injury to a person, or
2) property damage OTHER THAN TO THE PRODUCT ITSELF

Question 32

SPL: damages: if harm is only to the produt itself

Answer 32

only claim P can make is breach of warranty (not SPL, ni negligence)

Question 33

SPL: defenses: list

Answer 33

1) misuse
2) alteration
3) assumption of risk

Question 34

defense: misuse: def

Answer 34

if P uses product in manner that is NEITHER INTENDED NOR FORESEEABLE, then has misused product and cannot recover

Question 35

defense: alteration: def

Answer 35

where 3rd person unforeseeably + substantially alters product, no liability for D

Question 36

defense: alteration: “alter” def

Answer 36

changes in design, formula, function, etc

Question 37

assumption of risk in SPL rule

Answer 37

just like in regular SL, comparative fault is no defense – only assumption of the risk

Question 38

RIL is only for

Answer 38

negligence + breach

Question 39

negligence product liability: who can sue?

Answer 39

any foreseeable P

Question 40

negligence product liability: proving breach

Answer 40

consider conduct of each D, was it reasonable?

unlike SPL focus is on the person not the product

Question 41

negligence product liability: RIL

Answer 41

can work instead of manufacturing defect

Question 42

neglifence product liability: defenses

Answer 42

same as any other negligence action

Question 43

breach of warranty claims: 2 kinds of warranties

Answer 43

1) express

2) implied

Question 44

express warranty: def

Answer 44

D made a representation re nature or quality of product (that becomes basis of transaction) (can be seller at any level)

Question 45

implied warranty: def

Answer 45

if merchant – implied warranty that the goods are of average quality for goods of taht kind + generally fit for purpose that these goods are normally used

Question 46

implied warranty: exceptions

Answer 46

1) problems w privity or notice

2) if warranty was disclaimed