3. Strict Liability Flashcards
What is the General Rule for Strict Liability?
In strict liability, a defendant is liable for injuring a plaintiff whether or not the defendant exercised due care.
What are the three elements required to prove strict liability?
- The nature of the defendant’s activity imposes an absolute duty to make safe
- The dangerous aspect of the activity is the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury
- The plaintiff suffered damage to person or property
What are the two categories of activities where a defendant can be held strictly liable?
- Possession of animals
- Abnormally dangerous activities
What is a wild animal?
A wild animal is one NOT customarily devoted to the service of humankind at the time and in the place where it is kept.
What is a defendant’s strict liability for a plaintiff’s injury from a wild animal?
A defendant keeping a wild animal is strictly liable for injuries caused by the animal’s dangerous nature, regardless of foreseeability.
What is a defendant’s strict liability for a plaintiff’s injury from a domestic animal?
A defendant is strictly liable for injuries caused by their domestic animal if it has known dangerous propensities recognizable by a reasonable owner.
What types of domestic animals cannot be held for strict liability?
- Bulls
- Stallions
- Mules
- Rams
- Bees
What is the defendant’s strict liability for injuries to unknown trespassers from domestic animals on defendant’s land?
There is no liability for injuries inflicted by a defendant’s domestic animals while the plaintiff is trespassing on the defendant’s land.
What is the defendant’s strict liability for injuries to privileged individuals from domestic animals on defendant’s land?
Defendant is strictly liable for injuries inflicted by a defendant’s domestic animal if the plaintiff is coming to the rescue of an individual in peril on the defendant’s land.
What is the defendant’s strict liability for injuries by known, frequent, or child trespassers from domestic animals on defendant’s land?
A defendant is only liable for negligence and not strict liability.
What is the defendant’s strict liability for injuries by any trespassers from wild animals on defendant’s land?
A defendant is strictly liable for trespass by their wild animals or livestock if they are likely to escape, trespass, and cause damage.
What is the rule for abnormally dangerous activities for strict liability?
- The activity creates a risk of serious injury to the plaintiff, his land, or his chattels
- This risk cannot be eliminated by the exercise of due care
- The activity is not usually conducted in the area
- Plaintiff is injured by the risk that makes the activity dangerous
When is a defendant liable for an abnormally dangerous activity?
The defendant will be strictly liable ONLY IF the harm results from the risk that makes the defendant’s activity abnormally dangerous.
Will the defendant be liable because of the abnormal sensitivities of the plaintiff’s activities?
No, strict liability will NOT be imposed if the harm occurred only because of the abnormal sensitivities of the plaintiff’s activities.
What are the two requirements for an activity to be considered abnormally dangerous?
- The activity must create a foreseeable risk of serious harm even when reasonable care is exercised by all actors
- The activity must not be a matter of common usage in the community
How can a plaintiff recover in strict liability for an abnormally dangerous activity?
Plaintiff can recover absent proof of fault as long as Defendant was involved and the activity caused the harm.
How can a defendant be relieved from strict liability?
An unforeseeable, intervening force could relieve a strict liable defendant of liability.
What is the general rule for a defendant raising contributory negligence to defeat strict liability?
A defendant generally may not raise contributory negligence as a defense.
When can a defendant raise contributory negligence to defeat strict liability?
A defendant can assert contributory negligence when the plaintiff knew of the danger justifying imposition of strict liability, and his contributory negligence caused exactly that danger to be manifested.
When can a defendant assert that plaintiff assumed the risk to defeat strict liability?
A plaintiff may be found to have assumed the risk of injury if the plaintiff knows or appreciates the danger and voluntarily exposes himself to such danger.
