Chapter 11 Strict Liability Flashcards
1
Q
Abnormally Dangerous Activity
A
There is no bright-line rule and courts are not all in agreement. 6 factors are usually considered:
- Existence of high degree of risk of some harm to person, land or chattels (personal property)
- Likelihood that resulting harm will be great
- Inability to eliminate risk by exercising reasonable care
- Extent to which activity is not a matter of common usage
- Inappropriateness of activity to place where it is carried on
- Extent to which its value to community is outweighed by its dangerous attributes
2
Q
Rationale for Imposing Strict Liability (2)
A
- To cause defendants to bear the risk of loss.
Rationale: It is easier for the defendant to bear the risk of loss than for the plaintiff. Merchants can internalize the costs of accidental losses and distribute those losses among all consumers who purchase their products. - To Prevent future harm
Rationale: Once courts impose strict liability on defendants, they arguable have a strong incentive to prevent the occurrence of future harm.
This goal is the primary goal of advocates of strict liability
3
Q
Two Defenses to Product Liability
A
- Lack of Proximate cause.
In states recognizing abnormally dangerous activities as bases for strict liability:
A defendant is strictly liable only for damage that resulted from the kind of risk that made the activity abnormally dangerous.
A defendant is not strictly liable for damage that occurred only because plaintiff was conducting an “abnormally sensitive” activity. - Assumption of Risk:
A plaintiff who knowingly, voluntarily, and either reasonably or unreasonably subjects himself to danger is barred from recovering on the basis of strict liability.
But the defense of contributory negligence usually will not bar plaintiff’s recovery.
4
Q
Strict Liability is usually applied to the following three categories:
A
- Animals
- When engaging in abnormally dangerous activities (not applicable in Texas)
- Product Liability