bus law chap 7

strict liability

Liability regardless of fault, imposed on defendants in cases involving abnormally dangerous activities, dangerous animals, or defective products.

what leads to strict liability

Abnormally dangerous activities, dangerous animals, or defective products.

abnormally dangerous activity

anything that involves a high risk of serious harm that cannot be completely guarded against by reasonable care.

strictly liable for harm caused by wild animals

Persons who keep wild animals are strictly liable for any harm inflicted by those animals.

product liability

Liability of manufacturers and sellers for physical harm or property damage caused by their goods.

theories of product liability

Negligence, misrepresentation, strict liability, and warranties.

product liability negligence

The failure to exercise the degree of care that a reasonable person would have exercised under the circumstances.

manufacturers exercising due care

Design the product, select materials, use appropriate production processes, assemble and test the product, place adequate warnings, and inspect components.

privity of contract

The relationship between the promisor and promisee of a contract.

no it is not required

Is privity of contract required in a negligence suit for product liability?

evidence in a product liability negligence suit

That the defendant's conduct was the 'cause in fact' of the injury and that it was the proximate cause.

misrepresentation in product liability

Fraudulent misrepresentation made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the facts, intended to induce reliance by the buyer.

strict product liability

A legal doctrine that holds manufacturers liable for defective products regardless of fault.

public policy reasons for strict product liability

Consumers should be protected against unsafe products, manufacturers should not escape liability, and manufacturers can better bear the costs of injuries.

six requirements for strict product liability

1) Product must be defective at the time of sale.

2) Defendant must be engaged in selling the product.

3) Product must be unreasonably dangerous.

4) Plaintiff must incur physical harm.

5) Defective condition must be the proximate cause.

6) Goods must not have been substantially changed.

defective product condition

The product is defective at the time it leaves the seller's hands and is unreasonably dangerous to the user.

unreasonably dangerous product

A product that is defective to the point of threatening a consumer's health and safety.

unreasonably dangerous product evidence

It must be dangerous beyond the expectation of the ordinary consumer or a less dangerous alternative must have been feasible but not produced.

1960s strict product liability significance

Courts began applying strict liability in landmark cases involving manufactured goods.

three types of product defects recognized in product liability law

Manufacturing defects, design defects, and inadequate warnings.

manufacturing defect

A departure from a product unit's design specifications resulting in products that are physically flawed, damaged, or incorrectly assembled.

opinions and testimony of experts

How do courts typically decide cases involving manufacturing defects?

what constitutes design defect

When a product is made according to design specifications but is still unsafe due to a faulty design.

evidence to successfully assert a design defect

That a reasonable alternative design was available and that the product was not reasonably safe due to the defendant's failure to adopt it.

Risk-utility analysis and consumer-expectation test

What analyses do courts use to determine if a product's design is defective?

product was defective due to inadequate warnings

instructions or warnings that fail to alert consumers of foreseeable misuse risks.

inadequate warning was the proximate cause of their injuries

What must a plaintiff demonstrate regarding inadequate warnings?

market-share liability

liability is shared among all firms that manufactured and distributed a product during a certain period when the specific source is unidentifiable.

product liability suit defense

Defendants can show there is no basis for the plaintiff's claim.

product liability preemption

A defense where government regulations preempt claims for product liability.

assumption of risk establishment

That the plaintiff knew and appreciated the risk and voluntarily assumed it.

product misuse

A defense against product liability raised when the plaintiff used a product in an unintended manner.

How comparative negligence affects product liability cases

It considers the actions of both the plaintiff and defendant when apportioning liability and damages.

commonly known dangers

Dangers associated with certain products that manufacturers need not warn users about.

knowledgeable user defense

manufacturers need not warn users who are expected to know the dangers associated with a product.

statutes of limitations

Restricts the time within which a product liability action may be brought.

statutes of limitations vs statutes of repose

it is dependent on the occurrence of a cause of action / are not and begin to run at an earlier date.