Strict Liability Flashcards
What is strict liability, and when is it imposed? (Feldman)
Strict liability is liability imposed on a defendant for causing harm irrespective of whether the defendant’s conduct was negligent, reckless, or otherwise at fault. A plaintiff must still prove essentially the same elements as a negligence claim, except that there is no need to show that the defendant failed to use reasonable care under the circumstances.
Strict liability is applied to situations like engaging in abnormally dangerous activities. (Exner - Dynamite Case)
What are the danger factors of strict liability? (Feldman)
The danger factors are the Hand formula restated: (1) Existence of a high degree of risk (P); (2) Likelihood of great harm (L); and (3) Inability to eliminate risk by reasonable
care (B).
What are the abnormality factors of strict liability? (Feldman)
The abnormality factors of strict liability are:
(1) Extent to which activity is not common – as compared to common activities that create reciprocal risks, e.g., driving
(2) Whether the activity is inappropriate to the place it is carried on
(3) Extent to which the activity’s value to the community is outweighed by its danger – e.g., oil industry in TX.
Is it fair to impose strict liability? (Feldman)
Yes. Strict liability ensures fair distribution of burdens and benefits.
Does strict liability enforce loss spreading? (Feldman)
Yes. Liability is assigned to a large actor defendant that can spread without insurance or a small actor defendant can spread through insurance.
Does strict liability help with accident avoidance? (Feldman)
Yes. The liable actor will probably reduce the risk over time.
For purposes of determining whether strict liability may be imposed for harm caused by an abnormally dangerous activity, will an activity be deemed unusual for the community simply because only a few people in the community engage in it, and most do not? (Feldman)
No. For purposes of determining whether strict liability may be imposed for harm caused by an abnormally dangerous activity, an activity will not be deemed unusual for the community simply because only a few people engage in it. For example, distributing natural gas will not necessarily give rise to strict liability just because only utility companies typically do it.
As long as the activity is normal for that community, the number of people in the community engaging in the activity is irrelevant. Strict liability may be imposed for an abnormally dangerous activity only if the activity is completely out of place in the community.
Generally, is the question of whether an activity is abnormally dangerous a matter of law for a judge to decide? (Feldman)
Yes. Generally, the question of whether an activity is abnormally dangerous is a matter of law to be decided by a judge.
However, this is only a general rule. In some contexts and some jurisdictions, parts of the question or the entire question of whether an activity is abnormally dangerous are questions of fact for a jury or other fact finder to decide.
What is the difference between a natural and non-natural use of land?
If an accident arises from unusual uses of land, the actor should bear the loss from the resulting harm. But if an accident arises from customary uses of land, the harm should lie where it falls. Non-natural uses of land are “chosen”—they arise from human agency—whereas natural uses are forced by the character of the land itself.
