T13 - Strict Liability Flashcards
STRICT LIABILITY
(LIABILITY WITHOUT FAULT)
Liability for animals: Domesticated Animals
Rule:
a. Trespassing Animals:
Domesticated animals (household pets & livestock)
- generally no SL
- Exception if knowledge of animal’s dangerous propensities.
- SL NOT available to trespassers
An owner is not strictly liable for injuries caused by domestic animals (including farm animals) unless they have KNOWLEDGE of that PARTICULAR animal’s DANGEROUS PROPENSITIES that are NOT COMMON to the species.
(Dog bite the first time no SL, dog bites the second time YES SL)
***Consider that a landowner may be liable on INTENTIONAL tort grounds for injuries inflicted by vicious watchdogs. CANNOT use Deadly force to propect property by itself.
Injury caused by the normally dangerous characteristics of domestic animals (for example, bulls or honeybees) does NOT create strict liability.
a. Trespassing Animals: An owner IS strictly liable for reasonably foreseeable damage done by a trespass of his animals.
An owner is strictly liable for the damage done by the trespass of his animals (other than household pets) as long as the damage was reasonably foreseeable. It does not matter that the owner acted with reasonable care to keep them from trespassing.
a. Trespassing Animals:
a. Trespassing Animals: An owner IS strictly liable for reasonably foreseeable damage done by a trespass of his animals.
An owner is strictly liable for the damage done by the trespass of his animals (other than household pets) as long as the damage was reasonably foreseeable. It does not matter that the owner acted with reasonable care to keep them from trespassing.
D owns a pet dog Fido. Last month Fido bit a friend who came over to D’s house for dinner. D strictly liable?
Last week, Fido bit a pedestrian while out for a walk. D strictly liable to the pedestrian?
D owns a pet dog Fido. Last month Fido bit a friend who came over to D’s house for dinner.
D is not strictly liable to the friend.
However, last week, Fido bit a pedestrian while out for a walk.
D will be strictly liable to the pedestrian because the first bite gave D knowledge that Fido has dangerous propensities.
Liability for animals: WILD Animals
WILD animals
- SL if possessed.
An owner is strictly liable to licensees and invitees for injuries caused by wild animals (even those kept as pets).
a. Strict Liability Not Available to [UNKNOWN] Trespassers: Strict liability will generally not be imposed in favor of trespassers. To recover for their injuries from a wild animal (or abnormally dangerous domestic animal) a trespasser must prove the owner’s negligence.
Strict liability generally is not imposed in favor of undiscovered trespassers against landowners in the absence of negligence, such as when the landowner knows that the trespassers are on the land and fails to warn them of the animal.
Unless an owner of wild animals can rely on a public duty exception (e.g., a zookeeper), the owner is strictly liable for injuries caused by the wild animals, even those kept as pets.
The injury the D suffered must be within the “normal dangerous propensity” of the animal. Strict liability for wild animals includes liability for the harm that results when a person is attempting to flee from what is perceived to be a dangerous animal.
AKA, the harm must result from the kind of danger to be anticipated from the animal including harm caused by fleeing from the perceived danger.
ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITIES
Two part test for ADA:
1. Acitivy cannot be made reasonably safe even with ordinary care.
2. Acitivty is UNCOMMON in area where it is being conducted.
Courts generally impose TWO REQUIREMENTS for finding an activity to be abnormally dangerous:
• The activity must create a FORESEEABLE RISK OF SERIOUS HARM EVEN WHEN reasonable care IS EXERCISED by all actors.
• The activity is NOT A MATTER OF COMMON USAGE in the community
Common examples
- explosives
- Dangerous chemical/biological materials (storing or transporting dangerous chemicals or biological materials)
- Nuclear energy/ high dose of radiation (does NOT include X-rays!)
As with negligence, the D’s liability extends only to foreseeable Ps.
Also, the harm must result from the kind of danger to be anticipated from the dangerous activity (or animal) including harm caused by fleeing from the perceived danger.
Strict liability does NOT apply when the injury is caused by something OTHER than the dangerous aspect of the activity (for example, a dynamite truck suddenly blows a tire and hits a pedestrian but does not explode).
NOTE: the exercise of reasonable care will not relieve the defendant of liability in a strict liability situation.
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
Possible Claims?
Products liability refers to the liability of a supplier of a defective product to someone injured by the product.
Theories of Liability - There are five theories of liability that a plaintiff may use (to bring a claim):
• Intent
• Negligence - Could be negligence claim
• Implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose - Could be UCC claim
• Representation theories (express warranty and misrepresentation) - Could be misrepresentation/fraud claim if based on product warnings
• Strict liability - Could be STRICT LIABILITY
If they say P sued for “negligence”, do NOT apply the SL analysis!
If the question does not indicate what theory of liability the plaintiff is using, apply a strict liability theory because that is the easiest to prove.
ELEMENTS FOR STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY (more clear)
- A Commercial Supplier
- A defective product: three types
a. Manufacturing defect
b. Design defect
1) Product was not safe for its intended use
2) Product could have been made safe without serious impact on its price or utility
c. Information defect (inadequate warning) - Actual Cause: Defect was in existence when product left D’s control.
- Proximate Cause: Reasonable foreseeable use by P
- P suffered damages. —same as negligence—many courts will deny recovery if only economic loss is involved.
Strict Products Liability: A commercial seller who places a product in the stream of commerce may be strictly liable in tort for injuries caused by a defective product. In order to prevail in an SPL cause of action, plaintiff must show the D is a commercial supplier of a product, production or sale of a product that was defective, the defect existed when it left the D’s control, actual and proximate causation, and damages.
Elements for Strict Liability for PRODUCT LIABILITY
To find liability under a strict liability theory, the plaintiff must show:
- D is a merchant (routinely deals with goods of this type),
- ONLY a merchant can be liable. (in other words, a commercial sup- plier of the product) - The product is defective
- Manufacturing defect: Product emerges from manufacturing different from others and more dangerous than consumers would expect.
- Design defect: When the risks associated with the product’s design outeweigh the utlity of the design.
• P must show alternative design:
•• would have been safer AND
•• would be practical (would not interfere with its primary purpose). [Ex- compact cars are designed in a way that does not protect the driver, but that it part of its practicality as a subcompact car]
•• Was economically feasible
Adequate warnings
- Prominent
- Comprehensible - Product was not substantially altered sine leaving D’s control.
- Presumption that product moved in ordinary channels of distribution has no alteration. - Plaintiff was making foreseeable use of the product at the time of injury.
- Foreseeable does NOT mean intended or appropriate use of the product.
Elements for Strict Liability for PRODUCT LIABILITY
1. D is a merchant (routinely deals with goods of this type),
- D is a merchant (routinely deals with goods of this type),
- ONLY a merchant can be liable. (in other words, a commercial sup- plier of the product)
- Does Not Extend to Casual Sellers. Casual seller is NOT a merchant. Casual sellers will not be held strictly liable.
- Does Not Extend to Services. Service providers that incidentally make products available are NOT merchants. Strict products liability applies only to products. Even when a product is provided incident to a service (for example, blood during an operation), there is no strict liability. The plaintiff may, however, sue in negligence.
- Commercial lessor IS merchant. Most states include commercial lessors. AKA, those who rent rather than sell products also can be held strictly liable.
- Includes Entire Distribution Chain. Everyone in distribution chain is merhant. (privity of K is NOT required). Commercial suppliers include manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers. Privity is not required—users, consumers, and bystanders can sue.
*** In all products liability actions, the fact that there was no contractual privity between the P and D will NOT prevent P from recovering. any foreseeable P, including a bystander, can sue any commercial supplier in the chain of distribution regardless of the absence of a contractual relationship between them.
Elements for Strict Liability for PRODUCT LIABILITY
2. The product is defective.
Types of Defects?
- The product is defective
•Manufacturing defect: Product emerges from manufacturing different from and more dangerous from others that were properly made.
LIABLE IF: D will be liable if P can show that the product failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect (the D must anticipate reasonable misuse). (Note this also applies to defective food products.)
• Design defect: When the risks associated with the product’s design outweigh the utility of the design.
- When all products of a line are the same but have dangerous propensities, they may be found to have a design defect.
- P must show D could have used feasible alternative design:
— Product would have been safer AND
— would be practical (would not interfere with its primary purpose/utility).
[Ex- compact cars are designed in a way that does not protect the driver, but that it part of its practicality as a subcompact car]
— Was economically feasible (would not interfere with its price).
* Manufacturers will not be held liable for some dangerous products (knives) if the danger is apparent and there is no safer way to make the product
— Government Safety Standards: A product’s noncompliance with government safety standards establishes that it is defective, while compliance with safety standards (including labeling requirements) is evidence—but not conclusive—that the product is not defective.
• Information Defects: Product may be defective as a result of the manufacturer’s failure to give adequate instructions or warnings as to the risks involved in using the product that may not be apparent to users. For prescription drugs and medical devices, warnings given to “learned intermediaries” (for example, the prescribing physician) will usually suffice in lieu of warnings to the patient.
Adequate warnings
- Prominent
- Comprehensible
Elements for Strict Liability for PRODUCT LIABILITY
3. Product was not substantially altered sine leaving D’s control.
- Product was not substantially altered sine leaving D’s control.
- Presumption that product moved in ordinary channels of distribution has no alteration.
Existence of Defect When Product Left Defendant’s Control
The P must show that the product has not been significantly altered since it left the defendant’s control.
If the product moved through normal channels of distribution, it will be inferred that the product was not altered and that the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s control.
Elements for Strict Liability for PRODUCT LIABILITY
4. Plaintiff was making foreseeable use of the product at the time of injury.
- Plaintiff was making foreseeable use of the product at the time of injury.
- Foreseeable does NOT mean intended or appropriate use of the product.
Misuse of Product May Be Foreseeable:
The P must have been making a foreseeable use of the product at the time of the injury.
A D will not be held liable for dangers not foreseeable at the time of marketing.
Nature of Damages Recoverable
for SL product liability?
Physical injury or property damage must be shown. Recovery will be denied if the sole claim is for economic loss.
Disclaimers in SL?
Disclaimers Ineffective.
Disclaimers are irrelevant in strict liability cases if personal injury or property damages occur.
