Strict Liability Flashcards
Strict Liability
Rule: Defendant is strictly liable even if not acting negligently.
Applies to three general categories:
- Abnormally dangerous activities
- Wild Animals
- Defective products
Abnormally Dangerous Activities
Basic Rule: A defendant engaged in an abnormally dangerous activity will be held strictly liable for personal injuries and property damage caused by the activity, regardless of precautions to prevent harm.
Factors to Determine Abnormally Dangerous Activity
- Whether it creates a foreseeable and highly significant risk of harm even when actor takes due care
- The severity of the harm resulting from the risk
- The appropriateness of the location for the activity
- Whether the activity has great value to the community
Scope of Liability
Defendant is liable for the harm(s) that flow from the risk made by the abnormally dangerous activity
Wild Animals
Wild Animals: Animals that, as a species or class, are not customarily kept in the service of humankind [unless that animal poses no obvious risk of causing substantial injury.]
Dangerous Propensity: Owners are strictly liable fir the harm arising from the animal’s dangerous propensities.
Trespassers: Not held strictly liable. Some jurisdictions have an exception for vicious guard dogs.
Invitees and Licensees: Strictly liable
Domestic Animals
Rule: If the owner knows or has reason to know that the particular animal has dangerous propensities then the owner is strictly liable.
Dog-Bite Statutes: Many states hold dog owners strictly liable for injuries caused by dogs.
Trespassing Animals
Rule: An owner of any animal is strictly liable for reasonably foreseeable damage caused by his animal while trespassing on the property of another.
Exceptions
- Household pets–unless the owner knows or had reason to know that pet was harmfully intruding on the property of another.
- Animals on public roads (Apply Negligence Standard)
Defenses to Strict Liability
- Contributory Negligence: Plaintiff’s contributory negligence DOES NOT bar recovery
- Comparative Negligence: Partial bar to recovery depending on jurisdiction and type of comparative negligence.
- Assumption of Risk: Complete bar to plaintiff recovery
Claim Types of Products Liability
- Negligence
- Strict Liability
- Breach of Warranty Claim
Negligence as Claim Type for Products Liability
Apply the Elements of Negligence
Strict Products Liability as a Claim Type
Three Types of Defective Products:
- Manufacturing Defects
- Design Defects
- Failure to Warn
Elements
Plaintiff Must Prove
- The product was defective (in one of the three categories above);
- The defect existed when the product left the defendant’s control; AND,
- The defect caused the plaintiff’s injury when the product was used in a foreseeable way.
Manufacturing Defect
Prove by showing
- The product deviated from the intended design for the product OR
- The product does not conform to the manufacturer’s own specifications
Design Defect
TWO TESTS
- Consumer Expectation Test: The product is defective in design if it is less safe than the ordinary consume would expect
- Risk-utility Test: The product is defective in design if the risks outweigh the benefits. Must show that there is no reasonable alternative to the design [which usually requires expert opinion].
Failture to Warn
It is failure to warn of a foreseeable risk that is not obvious to an ordinary user.
Inference of Defect: Court will admit circumstantial evidence of the defect–especially when the product was destroyed
EXCEPTIONS
Learned Intermediary Rule: Warning a learned intermediary instead of the consumer directly.
[Drug companies must warn doctors of risks of medications. They do not necessarily need to warn potential patients UNLESS they are marketing directly to consumers.]
Defendants in Product Liability Cases
No privity requirement. Plaintiffs can sue anyone up or down the distribution chain.
Defendant must be in the chain of distribution and in the business of selling [merchant].
Damages for Strict Product Liability
Can recover for personal injury or property damage. Pure economic loss is generally impermissible under strict liability [unless a type of warranty claim].
Defenses to Strict Product Liability (8)
- Comparative Fault: Reduces recovery
- Contributory Negligence: Rarely allowed
- Assumption of Risk: Bars recovery so long as plaintiff knew of risk and engaged voluntarily
- Product Misuse, Modification, Alteration: Manufacturer will remain liable so long as the misuse/modification/alteration was foreseeable
- Substantial Change in the Product: Bars recovery
- Compliance with Government Standards: Evidence of compliance is admissible but not dispositive evidence.
- State of the Art Defense: In some jurisdictions, if product is state of the art at time of manufacturing or provides warning that it is state of the art then it is proof that product is not defective [just new]. May be a bar to recovery depending on jurisdiction.
- Disclaimers, Waivers, and Limitations: Generally does not bar recovery
