Strict Liability (SL), Warranties, Nuisance, & Grab Bag Topics Flashcards
Strict Liability PFC
- nature of Ds activity imposes an absolute duty to make safe
- the dangerous aspect of the actvity was the actual and proximate cause of Ps injury
- and the P suffered damage to person or property
Areas of Strict Liability
- SL for Injuries caused by animals
- SL for Abnormally dangerous activities
- SL for Defective Products
Strict Liability to Animals Groupings
Animals divided into 2 groups
- Domesticated - Pets and livestock
- Wild Animals
Strict Liability for Domesticated Animals (Pets & Livestock)
- No strict liability - no liability
- Exception:
- If you have knowledge of vicious propensities of the particular domestic animal, then strict liability
- Propensity Cannot be common to the species as a whole
- If you have knowledge of vicious propensities of the particular domestic animal, then strict liability
Rule for Strict Liability on Dogs
- once your dog has bitten someone, you have knowledge your dog has vicious propensity (every dog gets 1 free bite)
- Exception to this notice:
- No strict-liability to trespasser on your own land
- Exception to this notice:
Strict Liability on Wild Animals
If you keep wild animals - you are strictly liable
- Ex: Zoos, Carnivals, Tiger owner
Rule:
- Safety precautions are irrelevant because it is strict liability
Strict Liability for Abnormally Dangerous Activities Test:
- Activity creates a serious risk of foreseeable harm even when reasonable care is being exercised; and
- Cannot be made safe with existing tech
- The activity is not common within the community for which it is done
- Ex: Crop dusting in SF
SAFETY PRECAUTIONS ARE IRRELEVANT
Activites that are Abnormally Dangerous for Strict Liability
- Blasting
- Dealing w highly toxic chemical or biological material
- Anything involving high quantities of radiation and nuclear energy (not X-ray machine)
Strict Liability for Defective Products and Test
P will probably have multiple COA under these scenarios. SL is one of many
4 elements
- D must be a merchant
- Product must be defective
- Product not altered since leaving Ds hands
- P was making a foreseeable use of the product at time of accident or injury
A merchant for strict liability of Defective Products + Who is/isn’t a merchant
- A merchant is someone who routinely deals in goods of this type
- Who is Not a Merchant:
- Casual sellers (garage sale, Ebay, newspaper add) are not merchants
- Service providers are not merchants for products incidental to the service
- Who is a Merchant:
- Commercial lessors (someone who rents stuff) are merchants and can be held SL
- Every party in a distribution chain is a merchant and thus every party can be held SL
- Not limited to retailer
Ways in which a product may be defective for Strict Liability of Product Defects
Look to product, not person
3 ways it may be defective
- Manufacturing defect
- Design defect
- Information defect
Manufacturing Defect
If it differs from all the others that came off the same assembly line in a way that makes it more dangerous than consumers would expect
Ignore safety precautions
Design Defect and Rule
When there is an alternative way to build it that is a viable safer design
- The design must be practical
- It has to be only a little bit more expensive than the original
Comparison of risk v utility of the two designs
Information Defect Test
- When a product has residual risk
- that cannot be designed out
- and consumers are unaware of those risks
- Obvious risks don’t need to be warned like a knife
- and the product lacks adequate warnings
- May need to be in words, multiple locations, in multiple languages
Product Not Altered Since Leaving Ds Hands Element to Strict Liability for Product Defects
This element is presumed satisfied if moved in ordinary channels of distribution
BoP switches to D to prove it was altered after it left their hands
P was making a foreseeable use of the product at time of accident or injury element to strict liability for product defects
Test is foreseeability
A foreseeable use is not necessarily a proper or intended use
Ex: standing on a chair is foreseeable
Affirmative Defense to Strict Liability for Product Defects
Only defense available is comparative responsibility
It’s the same as comparative fault under negligence
Damages for Strict Liability
Physical Injury or Property Damage must be shown
Recovery will be denied if the sole claim is for economic loss
Implied Warranties
- Merchantability
- Fitness
Implied Warranty of Merchantability
whether the goods are of average acceptable quality and are generally fit for the ordinary purpose for which the goods are used.
Implied Warranty of Fitness
when the seller knows or has reason to know the particular purpose for which the goods are rquired and that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill and judgment in selecting the goods
Nuisance
Harm: An interference with somebody’s ability to use and enjoy somebody’s property to an unreasonable degree
Rules for Nuisance
- D can only be liable if intentionally, negligently or engaged in inherently dangerous activity
- Intent is presumed if you know it’ll come to pass
- Degree of interference has to be significant
- Courts will balance the interests of the parties
3 grab bag topics that can be used anywhere
- Vicarious liability
- Co-Defendants
- Loss of Consortium Claims
Vicarious Liability and Its Relationship
Always triggered by a relationship of some kind (3 parties +)
4 relationships
- Employer-employee
- A hiring party- independent contractor
- Owner-Driver
- Parents-kids
Vicarious liability is always a doctrine of last resort
Employer-employee Vicarious Liability and Its Exceptions
Employer is only vicarious liable if employee was acting within the scope of employment
Intentional torts are outside scope of employment
Exceptions:
- If job involved an authorized use of force
- when the force is misused there will be vic liability
- Friction is generated by employement
- Ex: bill collector
- If it is done out of a misguided desire to serve bosses purposes
Independent Contractor Vicarious Liability & Exception
No vicarious liability for IC
Exception:
- If you are a business owner and you hire an IC to work on the property, you are vic liable if an invitee is hurt on that property
Owner-driver Vicarious Liability and its Exception
Owner not liable for torts of driver
Exception:
- If you are doing an errand for me
Parent-Kids Vicarious Liability
Parents are not vic liable for torts of their kids
No exceptions
Co-Defendants
How much can the D who paid get from the co-defendant?
- Comparative contribution
- Collects from other guys based on comparative fault
- Indemnification (full reimbursement)
- Entitled when:
- Out of pocket party was only vic liable, can get indemnity from the active tortfeasor
- Or retailer held strictly liable for a product from the manufacturer
- Entitled when:
Loss of Consortium Claims
- The uninjured spouse gets the same claim against the Ds, the uninjured spouses claim is derivative (can raise the same defense against both Ps)
- Theory is to allow recovery for:
- Loss of services
- Loss of being able to talk to society
- Loss of sex