Strict Liability Flashcards
Two solutions to cattle trespass
- fence in. Rancher is required to fence in his cattle to keep them off his neighbor’s yard.
- Fence out. Farmer is required to fence out his neighbor’s cattle.
Nuisance BLL
- Substantial and
2. Unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment’s of another man’s land.
Unreasonable interference test
An interference is unreasonable when the gravity of the harm to the PL outweighs the utility of the DF’s conduct.
Nuisance remedies
- Injunction
2. Damages
Sensitive PLs with Nuisance
There is no nuisance unless invasion would substantially and unreasonably affect normal persons and normal land uses. With nuisance, you don’t apply the thin skull rule. You don’t take PL as you find him or her.
Balancing harms test
- How great is the harm to the PL?
- By how much is the value of the PL’s land diminished?
- Is the PL (DF) using his or her land in an unusual way or in accord with the traditional uses in the neighborhood?
Reciprocal Nuisance
Live and let live. No compensation.
An interference both parties will engage in.
Coming to the nuisance
PL moved next to the nuisance so should tolerate it. No enterprise is allowed to create a noisome condition on its own land. PL may have already been compensated by paying a lower price.
Rylands v. Fletcher Rule/ Mischief rule
The person who, for his own purposes, bring on his land, and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and, if he does not do so, he is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.
Bramwell
Anti Holmes. Holmes says loss lies where it falls b/c we do not want to discourage people from doing something socially useful. But Bramwell says well if it is doing so well the PL should be able to be compensated.
Direct Injury
If you have a direct injury, then apply the rule of Rylands v. Fletcher. Strict liability
If indirect injury, apply negligence.
Absolute Liability v. Strict Liability
Strict liability there is an excuse. Absolute liability there are no defenses.
Modern Law. Strict Liability
- high risk of physical harm, and
- not common usage.
Do not have to show DF breach of duty, proof, etc.
Public Policy on Common Usage
The more common the more we can presume the society is benefitting or using it. If not, then it can only be that one person.
Defense to Strict Liability
Contributory negligence
Assuming the risk
Comparative responsibility
