Essay issues - Strict products liability

Question 1

Strict products liability

Answer 1

To establish a case for strict liability, the plaintff must prove the defendant had an absolute duty; produced or sold a defective product; actual and proximate causation; and damages.

Question 2

Absolute duty

Answer 2

A D who is in the business of selling a commercial product, including manufacturers, distributors, and retail, is under an absolute duty to provide a safe prodcut.

Question 3

Defective product

Answer 3

A product is defective if it contains a manufacturing defect, design defect, or failure to warn.

Question 4

Manufacturing defect

Answer 4

A manufacturing defect is a deviation from what the manufacturer intended the product to be that causes harm to the P. The test is whether the product conforms to D’s own specifications.

Question 5

Design defect

Answer 5

A court will either apply the risk utility test or consumer expectation test to determine whether a design defect exists.

Risk utility test - The P must prove that a reasonable alternative design that is economically feasible was available to D, and failure to use that design rendered the product unreasonably safe.

Consumer expectation test - P must prove that the product is dangerous beyond the expectation of an ordinary consumer.

Question 6

Failure to warn

Answer 6

A failure to warn defect exists if there were foreseeable risks of harm, not obvious to an ordinary user, which could have been avoided by providing reasonable warnings.

Question 7

Causation

Answer 7

Actual cause - To be the actual cause of P’s injury, the product must’ve been defective when it left D’s control.

Proximate cause - To be the proximate cause of P’s injury, the injury must’ve occurred when the product was being used in an intended or reasonably foreseeable way. D will still be liable if P misuses the product if the misuse is foreseeable.

Question 8

Damages

Answer 8

P must suffer personal injury or property damage.

Question 9

Defenses

Answer 9

Contributory negligence - P’s negligence is a complete bar to recovery when P’s fault consisted of unreasonably proceeding in the face of a known product defect.

Comparative negligence - P’s damages are reduced by the proportion he was at fault.

Assumption of risk - P’s recovery is barred if he voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risk of behavior.

Question 10

Negligent products liability

Answer 10

Under a negligent products liability theory, a P must prove duty, breach, causation, and damages.

Question 11

Duty

Answer 11

A duty of care is owed to all foreseeable people that may be injured by defendant’s failure to meet the reasonable standard of care. Under the majority view, defendant is liable to plaintiffs w/in the zone of foreseeable harm. Under the minority view, defendant is liable to all harmed.

Question 12

Standard of care

Answer 12

The standard of care is that of a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances, measured by an objective standard.

Question 13

Breach

Answer 13

Defendant is in breach of his duty if he fails to meet the applicable standard of care.

Question 14

Causation, damages, and defenses

Answer 14

See above for the causation, damages, and defenses analyses.

Question 15

Implied warranty of merchantibility

Answer 15

Under the implied warranty of merchantability, a product that is sold is impliedly warranted to be reasonably useful and safe for average use.

Question 16

Express warranty (if applicable)

Answer 16

An express warranty is a promise made by the defendant about the product. If the product does not meet the warranty, the defendant has breached and plaintiff can recover damages.

Question 17

Implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose (if applicable)

Answer 17

Under this implied warranty, if a seller knows or has reason to know of a particular purpose for which it’s being purchased by buyer, then the seller is guaranteeing that the item is fit for that particular purpose.