Products Strict Liability

Question 1

Product Liability based on Strict Liability

Answer 1

Prima Facice Case:
* The defendant is a commercial supplier;
* The defendant produced or sold a product that was defective when it left the defendant’s control;
* The defective product was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury; and
* The plaintiff suffered damage to person or property.

Example:
Here, the paint company is a commercial supplier of a “defective” product. Although the primer was not actually defective in that it apparently performed as it was meant to do, it is legally defective if it was unreasonably dangerous and could be made safer by adequate warnings. Here, the paint company knew of the danger and could easily have placed a specific warning on the label. Even though professional users may have known of the danger, it was not obvious, and it could have been avoided at minimal cost by including a specific warning. That would have alerted the landlord to the danger, making it more likely that he would take precautions that would have prevented the tenant from being injured. To prove actual cause where the plaintiff’s claim is that the product is defective because of lack of an adequate warning, the plaintiff is entitled to a presumption that an adequate warning would have been read and heeded. Thus, the tenant can likely establish liability on her cause of action.