Day 4

Question 1

define abnormally dangerous activities

Answer 1

an uncommon activity that creates a foreseeable and highly significant risk of physical harm even when reasonable care is used.

Examples:
-transporting flammable gas
- TNT
- dangerous chemicals

Question 2

When can a D be held strictly liable for an abnormally dangerous activity ?

Answer 2

If the P’s harm results from the risk that made the activity abnormally dangerous in the first place.

Ie, harmed by spilled chemicals properties not just slipped in them.

Question 3

Breach of warranty, privity of contract requirements

Answer 3

the P must est. privity with the D to have standing to sue for breach of warranty. Under the maj. approach, the purchaser’s privity extends only to members of the purchasers family or household - but they can only recover for personal injury

Question 3

Commercial supplier strict liability right to indemnity

Answer 3

A commercial supplier along the chain of distribution may be strictly liable for physical harm caused by a products manufacturing defect that existed when the product left the supplier control. (IE the defect airplane engine).

However, comm. suppliers who did not negligently, recklessly, or intentionally fail to discover the product defect (ie no independent culpability) can seek indemnity, (ie full compensation) from commercial suppliers earlier in the chain of distribution.

Question 4

Assumption of the risk, defense to strict liability

Answer 4

Only in a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction (which is the default on the MBE), assumption of the risk is a defense to strict liability that:
1. reduces recovery when the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily exposed himself to an abnormally dangerous activity
and
2. bar recovery when the P received a benefit from his/her exposure to that activity.

IE: the state safety inspector injured at the mining storage facility. assumed the risk inherent in his job, and received the benefit of his employment.

Question 5

strict liability animals

Answer 5

wild animals, abnormally dangerous animals with a known dangerous propensity.

Also SL for reasonably foreseeable damage caused by trespassing animals.

Question 6

When is a product deemed to be defectively designed?

Answer 6

1. it poses a foreseeable risk of harm and
2. that risk could have been reduced by a foreseeable alternative designed, as determined by the risk utility test, -
   ( he risk utility test compares the risks and benefits of the original and alternative design)

classic example- chemistry set deemed as safe as possible, consistent with educational purposes, therefore its benefits exceed its risks

Question 7

difference between commercial and noncommercial sellers in strict products liability

Answer 7

generally D must be in the business of selling (including manufacturer, distributor and retail seller) to be held SL.

Casual sellers, auctioneers, P’s employer, and service providers generally not strictly liable.

Question 8

Unforeseeable use. for strict products liability

Answer 8

Unforeseeable misuse, alteration , or modification by the user precludes recovery (in most contributory neg. juris.) or reduces recovery (in comparative fault Juris).