Chapters 1-6 Flashcards
Braswell v Cincinnati Inc - A manufacturer was not held strictly liable in a case where someone had their arm amputated due to a design defect that occurred after the product was sold
• Cincinnati Inc properly warned people with proper safety features when it was sold
• The machine was resold several times and the safety features were removed
Cincinnati Inc was not responsible for those safety features being removed
Defect in manufacture
when a manufacturer fails to properly assemble a product, test a product, or check the quality of a product adequately
Coca-Cola v Dolinski
A guy sued after a decomposed mouse was found in the liquid the plaintiff drank. Coca-Cola was strictly liable due to them needing to adequately check the products quality
Defect in Design - Occurs when a product is designed incorrectly BUT
Does not impact just one product, but all products, and can cause injury
Braswell v Cincinnati Inc - A manufacturer was not held strictly liable in a case where someone had their arm amputated due to a design defect that occurred after the product was sold
- Cincinnati Inc properly warned people with proper safety features when it was sold
- The machine was resold several times and the safety features were removed
- Cincinnati Inc was not responsible for those safety features being removed
- The machine was resold several times and the safety features were removed
Defect in Packaging
When a product has been placed in packaging that is insufficiently tamperproof
If tamperproof protection was not placed on a bottle, and someone put cyanide in it–what would that be?
Defect in Packaging
Five most common defenses to product liability
Generally known danger, government contractor defense, abnormal misuse of a product, supervening event, assumption of the risk
Certain products are inherently dangerous and known to the general population to be so (guns shoot bullets and bullets hurt therefore they don’t need to place a warning on the barrel of a gun)
Generally Known Danger
Contractors who were provided specifications by the government is not liable for any defect in the product that occurs as a result of those specifications
Government Contractor Defense
A lawn mower seller is not liable in case someone lifts the lawnmower up to try and cut the hedge?
Abnormal Misuse of a product
Manufacturers are not liable if a product is materially altered or modified after it leaves the sellers possession.
Supervening Event
Assumption of the Risk - Can be asserted as a defense to product liability, but requires:
○ The plaintiff knew and appreciated the risk
○ Plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk
**Think Prescription Drugs
Made when the seller makes a material representation about a products composition, durability, performance, or safety
Express Warranty
Can be implied from the facts that the sellers has offered the goods for sale
Implied Warranties
If you buy a blender, it should blend)
Warranty of merchantability
Any merchant implicitly warrants the product is sold or is fit for its ordinary purposes, and conveys with the sale of product irrespective of the seller’s statements
Warranty of merchantability
Tort
a “wrong” whereby a persons or business is injured by the tortious actions of others
Lawful protection of a person against unauthorized touching, restraint, or other contac
Intentional Torts
Threat of immediate harm or offensive contact, or any action that arouses reasonable apprehension of imminent harm
Assault
Where an individual’s intent to injure another is transferred to the crime that may occur if someone else gets injured instead
Transferred Intent Doctrine
Restraining someone without their consent
False Imprisonment
Merchant protection statutes / shopkeeper’s privilege exempts shop owners from false imprisonment of shoplifters only IF
there are reasonable grounds for suspicion, suspects are detained for a reasonable time, and investigations are conducted in a reasonable manner
Any attempt by another person to appropriate a living person’s name or identity for commercial purposes
Misappropriation
Exception to misappropriations include:
events of historical significance, such as the Rosa Parks story
Slander vs Libel
Slander is spoken, libel is written (Does not include opinions)
The failure to do something that a reasonable person would do
Negligence
In order to prove something is negligent there must be:
Duty of Care, Reasonable Standard, Breach of Duty of Care, Proximate Cause
the duty people owe each other (not to cause unreasonable risk or harm)
Duty of Care
reasonable professional standard
where someone in a similar scenario is imagined whether or not they do the same thing
the failure to act as a reasonable person would act
Breach of the duty of care
The farther removed someone is from the cause of a negligent tort, the less liable they are
Proximate Cause
When a negligent act violates a statute or ordinance
Negligence Per Se
The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove not negligent in this scenario
Res ipsa loquitu
Under Res ipsa loquitu, there is a presumption of negligence due to:
Defendant was in exclusive control of the situation
Plaintiff would not have suffer injury except for someone’s negligence
Extreme departure from ordinary standard of conduct. Can be willful or reckless behavior
Gross Negligence
