Products Liability

Question 1

Products Liability

Answer 1

There are 5 theories a P may use to recover for injuries caused by a defective product:
1. Intent, 2. SL, 3. Neg., 4. Warranty, and 5. Misrepresentation.

For each theory, the P must establish the defect first, then show that it existed when the product left the D’s control.

Question 2

Products Liability Based on Intent

Answer 2

D is liable to anyone injured by an unsafe product if D intended the consequences or knew that they were substantially certain to occur. Punitive damages allowed here. Defenses same as in intentional torts.

Question 3

Products Liability Based on Strict Products Liability

Answer 3

A manufacture/supplier is SL when an article he places on the market proves to have a defect that causes harm to a human. This is liability without fault. Prima Facie Case requires:

1. That the D be a commercial supplier;
2. That the product was not altered since leaving D’s control;
3. That the product has a defect;
4. That the P was making a foreseeable use of the product; and,
5. That the defect caused damages.

Question 4

Commercial supplier w/No Alteration

Answer 4

A commercial supplier is one that is in the regular business of producing the product or selling the product. To be liable under strict product liability, the D must:

1. Be a commercial supplier;
2. Place the product in the stream of commerce; and
3. Without substantial alteration

Question 5

Defect

Answer 5

Defects can be:

1. Design Defects
2. Manufacturing Defects:
3. Warning Defects

A product’s non-compliance w/govt safety standards est. that it is defective, but compliance is NOT conclusive evidence that a product is not defective.

Question 6

Design Defect SPL

Answer 6

A design defect occurs when all products of a line are the same but have dangerous propensities. Often if there is a design defect, there will be a warning defect. 2 Tests apply.

1. Consumer Expectation test: D will be liable if P can show that the product failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect (D must anticipate reasonable misuse) or
2. Risk-Utility Test: Plaintiff must show that the D could have made the product safe, without serious impact on the product’s price or utility.

Question 7

Manufacturing Defect SPL

Answer 7

Occurs when a product doesn’t conform to the manufacturer’s specifications or intentions and is thus more dangerous. Design defect tests apply here.

Question 8

Warning Defect SPL

Answer 8

Occurs when the manufacturer fails to give adequate warnings as to the risks involved in using the product that may not be apparent to users. To determine whether there is a warning defect, ask whether a reasonable manufacturer, knowing of the defect would put this product on the market without a warning.

Question 9

Existence of Defect when Product Left D’s Control SPL

Answer 9

The defect must have existed when the product left D’s control. This will be inferred if the product moved through normal channels of distribution.

Question 10

Defenses to SPL

Answer 10

Some states allow comparative neg. Contrib Neg and Assumption of the Risk are not defenses if it was foreseeable. Disclaimers are ineffective if personal injury or property damages occur.

Question 11

Negligent PL

Answer 11

Similar to regular Negligence

Elements: Duty, Breach, Causation, Nature of damages recoverable, defenses.

Question 12

Warranties-PL

Answer 12

Personal injury, property damages, and pure economic loss are recoverable under warranty theory. There are express and implied warranties.

Question 13

Express Warranty

Answer 13

Any affirmation of fact or promise concerning goods that becomes part of the basis of the bargain. P need only show that the product didn’t live up to its warranty to establish breach. Still need to prove causation and damages.

Question 14

Implied Warranties of Fitness and Merchantability

Answer 14

Implied Warranty of Fitness for Particular Purpose: Is implied in every sale of goods when the seller knows or has reason to know that particular purpose for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill and judgment in selecting the goods.

Implied Warranty of Merchantability: Implied in every sale of goods that they are of average acceptable quality and generally fit for the ordinary purpose for which the goods are used.

Question 15

Breach of Warranty SPL

Answer 15

D is liable when the product fails to live up to any of the above standards. P doesn’t have to prove fault on the part of D.

Question 16

Defenses to Warranty-SPL

Answer 16

Assumption of the risk, contributory negligence to the same extent as in SL cases, and failure to give notice of breach is a defense under the UCC.

Question 17

Misrepresentation-SPL

Answer 17

Seller will be liable for misrepresentations of facts concerning a product where:

1. The statement was a material fact concerning quality or uses of goods; and
2. The seller intended to induce reliance by the buyer in a particular transaction.

P still must prove justifiable reliance on the misrep, causation, and damages.

Question 18

Defenses to Misrepresentation-SPL

Answer 18

Contrib neg, as in SL unless D committed intentional misrepresentation.