Chapter 7: Strict Liability and Product Liability Flashcards

1
Q

Liability regardless of fault

A

A person who engages in (abnormally dangerous activities) certain activities can be held responsible for any harm that results to others, even if the person used the utmost care

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Abnormally Dangerous Activities

A
  1. Involves serious potential harm
  2. Involves high degree of risk that cannot be made safe
  3. Are not commonly performed in the community or area
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

How do the courts apply strict liability to product liability

A
  1. The manufacturer can better bear the cost of injury because it can spread the cost throughout society by price increases
  2. The manufacturer is making a profit from its activities and should bear the cost of injury as an operating expense
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Product Liability

A

Tort action and can apply when product defects cause injury or property damage to consumers, users or bystanders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Product Liability can be based on:

A
  1. Negligence
  2. Misrepresentation (Fraud)
  3. Strict Liability
  4. Warranty Theory (under UCC)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Negligence-based product liability is based on:

A

Manufacturer’s breach of reasonable standard of care and failing to make a product safe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Elements to prove negligence (Plaintiff must prove)

A
  1. Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty of care
  2. Defendant breached that duty
  3. Defendant breach caused the injury (Causation in fact & Proximate cause)
  4. Plaintiff suffered an injury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Manufacturer must exercise “due care” in:

A
  1. Designing products
  2. Selecting materials
  3. Using the appropriate production process
  4. Assembling and testing the product
  5. Placing adequate warning labels to inform users of danger of which an ordinary person might not be aware
  6. Inspecting and testing the product
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Is privity of contract required between plaintiff and manufacturer?

A

No, liability extends to any person’s injuries caused by a negligently-made (defective product)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Product Liability Based on Misrepresentation

A
  • Occurs when fraud committed against consumer or user of product and injury.
  • Must have been made knowingly or with reckless disregard for safety. (Buyer must have relief on misrepresentation)
  • Plaintiff does not have to show product was defective
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Strict Product Liability

A

Manufacturers liable without regard to fault based on public policy
1. Consumers must be protected from unsafe products
2. Manufacturers should be liable to any user of the product (regardless of contract privity)
3. Manufacturers, sellers and distributors can bear the costs of injuries since it is making a profit from the activity (pass costs to consumers)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Requirements for Strict Product Liability

A

Plaintiff must show product was so “defective” it was “unreasonably dangerous” to recover damages:
1. Product must be in defective condition when sold
2. Defendant is in the business of selling the product
3. Product must be unreasonably dangerous
4. Plaintiff must be physically harmed
5. Defective condition must be proximate cause of injury
6. Goods have not been substantially changed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

How to prove a defective condition

A
  1. Plaintiff need not show why or in what manner product became defective
  2. Plaintiff must show product was defective hen it left control of seller
  3. The defect made it unreasonably dangerous
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Unreasonable Dangerous Product

A
  1. Product was dangerous beyond the expectation of the ordinary consumer
  2. A less dangerous alternative was economically feasible for the manufacturer, but the manufacturer failed to produce it
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

How can a product be “unreasonably dangerous”

A

Due to a flaw in the manufacturing process, defective design, or an inadequate warning label

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Three types of product defects

A
  1. Manufacturing defects
  2. Design defects
  3. Warning defects
17
Q

Manufacturing defects

A

Occurs when a product departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product

18
Q

Design Defects

A

Product is unreasonably dangerous as designed even if its is manufactured correctly

19
Q

Test for Design Defects

A

Plaintiff must show:
1. A reasonable alternative design was available
2. Defendant’s failure to use a reasonable alternative design rendered the product not reasonably safe

20
Q

Risk-Utility Analysis

A

Determines whether the risk of harm from the product outweighs its utility

21
Q

Consumer Expectation Test

A

A product is unreasonably dangerous when it fails to perform in a manner that would reasonably be expected by an ordinary consumer

22
Q

Difference between Risk-Utility Analysis and Consumer Expectation

A

Risk-Utility is more design based. Consumer expectation is consumer based

23
Q

Warning Defects

A
  • Liability based on foreseeability that proper instructions/labels would have made the product safe to use
  • No duty to warn about obvious or commonly known risk
  • Seller must also warn about injury due to product misuse. Key is whether misuse is foreseeable
24
Q

Content of Warning

A

Courts apply a “reasonableness” test to determine if the warnings adequately alert consumers to the product’s risks

25
Q

Obvious Risks

A

No duty to warn about obvious or commonly known risks

26
Q

State Law and Constitutionality

A

An action alleging that a product is defective due to an inadequate label can be based on state law, but that law must not violate the U.S. Constitution

27
Q

Market-Share Liability

A
  • Liability when multiple defendants contributed to manufacture of same defective product
  • Each defendant is proportionately liable based on its market share
28
Q

Who can sue for strict product liability?

A

Consumers, Users and bystanders

29
Q

Defenses to Product Liability

A
  1. Preemption
  2. Assumption of Risk
  3. Product Misuse
  4. Comparative Negligence (Fault)
  5. Commonly Known Dangers
  6. Knowledgeable User
  7. Statutes of Limitations
  8. Statutes of Repose
30
Q

Preemption

A

Government regulations preempt claims for product liability

31
Q

Assumption of Risk

A
  1. The plaintiff knew and appreciated the risk created by the alleged product defect 2. The plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk, even though it was unreasonable to do so (product recall)
32
Q

Product Misuse

A
  1. Plaintiff was misusing the product
  2. Plaintiff’s misuse was not reasonably foreseeable to the defendant
    EX: lady who stuck her fingers in tanning bed fan
33
Q

Comparative Negligence (Fault)

A

Plaintiff’s own negligence or wrongful acts contributed to her injury

34
Q

Common Known Dangers

A

A danger so commonly known that the defendant had no duty to warn plaintiff (knife, chain-saw)

35
Q

Knowledgeable User

A

A danger so commonly known by particular users of the product that the defendant had no duty to warn plaintiff

36
Q

Statutes of Limitations

A

Vary by state law, but are typically 2-4 years

37
Q

Statutes of Repose

A

Place outer time limits on product liability actions so that sellers and manufactures are not left vulnerable to lawsuits indefinitely
EX: “I bought this 20 years ago and just now got injured”