Midterm- Products Liability Flashcards
Products liability definition
An area of law which examines liability for injury and damages caused by products which are defective in their intended normal usages.
Product
A product is a chattel that is moveable and is either milled or manufactured.
Chattel
All property other than realty. Realty is land and all that is affixed to it.
Moveable
Chattel is moveable if it can be transported from one area to another even if it is just slightly.
Manufactured or Milled
Chattel is manufactured if it is assembled by putting different materials together or if it undergoes a process; it is milled if after being severed from land it is treated, worked on, or shaped.
Defect
A product is defective if it has an imperfection. A defect can be in design, manufacturing, or in failure to warn.
Design defect
A design defect exists if the manufacturer fails to use the available “state of the art” knowledge and technology to manufacture the product in question and all similar products causing it to fall below acceptable industry standards.
Manufacturing Defect
A product has a manufacturing defect if substandard workmanship or material was used in the assembly of the product in question or if the assembly process deviated from the original design.
Failure to Warn
When a product cannot be made safe in its intended normal usages a valid warning is required, if not the product is said to have a failure to warn defect. A warning is valid if it is conspicuous (location, language, size, color) and communicates the danger and how to avoid it.
Stream of Commerce
All person who place or move a defective product into or through the stream of commerce may be held liable for the resulting harm, including component manufacturers, manufacturers, distributors, wholesaler, and retailers. An individual or entity who derives a profit from the product is said to have participated in moving the product through the stream of commerce.
Stream of Commerce Conclusion
Therefore, all the defendant parties placed or moved the defective product through the stream of commerce and as a matter of public policy risk can be allocated to all defendants and it is correct to join them together and hold them jointly and severally liable.
Intent
An act is intentional if the defendant acted knowing with a substantial degree of certainty that a legally forbidden consequence or harm could occur.
Intentional Torts applicable
Battery- intent, harm or offensive (ordinary social usages), touching, another
trespass to land- intent, intrusion (unauthorized), land, another
Trespass to chattel - intent, substantial and unreasonable interference (impaired to condition, quality value) , personal property, another
Conversion- exercise of dominion and control (violates freedom of use), personal property, another, permanently deprive (total loss)
Negligence Duty
All manufacturers have a legal duty to manufacture product that are safe for their normal intended usages.
Negligence General Breach
Failure to act as would a reasonably prudent person in the same or similar circumstances.
Negligence Proximate Cause Intervening Variable and conclusion
An intervening variable is an act or occurrence that follows the act of the defendant but precedes and is directly related to the plaintiffs harm.
Therefore, the defendant is liable because the plaintiff suffered foreseeable harm as a direct result of the defendant’s act.
Warranties
Plaintiff may recover for damages if it proves that product warranties were breached. Warranties are either expressed (in writing) or implied. Implied warranties are either implied warranties of merchantability or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose.
Implied warranty of Merchantability
Requires that all product placed on the market be of fair and average quality for its normal intended usages. Normally…
Implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose
Applies when the seller knows the buyer’s intended purpose and makes a representation that the product is fit for the intended purpose prior to the sale. A representation can be either direct (overt) or indirect (tacit).
Strict Liability in Tort
In Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. the court held that a manufacturer can be found strictly liable in tort when a product it places on the market, knowing that it will be used without inspection, proves to have a defect that causes injury to a human being.
As established in the product section above, ABC has been identified as a manufactured.
Knowing that the product would be used without inspection.
It must be proven that the manufacturer knew that the plaintiff would use the product without inspection. Generally, a person buying _______ does not have the knowledge to identify [the defect]. Furthermore, even if the buyer has knowledge, the tools to determine if defect is present or not. [sometimes] And even if tools are available it is illogical to think that a buyer would break apart an assembled product.
Ultimate Conclusion
It would appear that plaintiff would be able to sustain a case in the area of product liability for negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability in tort. All entities in the stream of commerce would be jointly and severally liable for the plaintiff’s injuries.
