Strict Liability

Question 1

What is the prima facie case forstrict products liability?

Answer 1

1) ∆ is a merchant
2) Proof of defect
3) Product has not been altered since it left ∆’s hands
4) π is making a foreseeable use of the product

** Merchant includes commercial lessors and parties up the distribution chain, but doesn’t include casual sellers or service providers. No privity requirement.

** Non-alteration presumed unless it is a second-hand buyer

** Foreseeable uses not limited to intended uses

Types of Defects

Manufacturing Defect = Bad one that slipped through

Design Defect = There is a safer, viable (cost, practicality) design. Failure to conform to a gov’t regulation is conclusive proof of a defect BUT compliance is only evidence of a non-defect

Informational Defect = If the residual risks cannot be fixed and consumers will not be aware of the risk, manufacturer must give an adequate warning

NOTE: products liability can be brought under OTHER theories of tort [intent, ordinary negl., warranties of merchantability/fitness, and representation (warranties)]

Question 2

What are the basicstrict liability fact patterns?

Answer 2

1) Injuries Caused by WILD animals
2) Abnormally dangerous/ultra-hazardous activities

** Strict liability for DOMESTIC ANIMALS only if Δ knew of dangerous propensity;BUT no strict liability to trespasser, even if Δ knew

** Abnormally dangerous = creates a foreseeable risk, even when reasonable care is exercised; unusual in the area in which it being conducted

NOTE: the dangerous aspect of the activity has to be the actual/proximate cause of π’s injury for strict liability to attach

Question 3

What are the affirmative defenses toprima facie strict liability?

Answer 3

1) Comparative Responsibility
2) Assumption of Risk
3) Contributory Negligence
- If π failed to realize risk = NO defense
- If π knew, appreciate the danger, and his unreasonable conduct was the very cause of the harm = Defense