BLW 302 Ch.7

Strict liability

Liability regardless of fault

Abnormally dangerous activities

• Involve high risk of potential harm

• Involve high degree of risk that cannot be made safe

Wild animals

Owners keeping wild animals are strictly liable for injuries

Product liability

A manufacturer's, seller's, or lessors liability to:

• Consumers, users, and bystanders for physical harm/property damage that is caused by the goods

Due care must be exercised in:

• Design

• Selecting materials

• Production process

• Assembling and testing

• Adequate warnings

• Inspection and testing

Private of Contract not required:

No privity of contract required between plaintiff and manufacturer

Liability extends to any person's injuries caused by a negligently made (defective) product

“Cause in Fact” (Actual Cause) & Proximate Cause

Plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct was “cause in fact” of an injury

It must also be determined that the defendant’s act was the proximate cause of the injury

Misrepresentation

• Occurs when fraud committed against consumer or user of product

• Fraud must have been made knowingly or with reckless disregard for safety

• Plaintiff does not have to show product was defective

• Ex: No peanuts in product, but does use peanut oil

Strict product liability

Holds people liable for results of their acts, regardless of their intentions/exercise of reasonable care

Requirements for Strict Liability

1. Product must be in defective condition when sold.

2. Defendant is in the business of selling the product

3. Product must be unreasonably dangerous.

4. Plaintiff must be physically harmed.

5. Defective condition must be proximate cause of injury.

6. Goods are in substantially same condition

Proving a Defective Condition

• Plaintiff does not need to show why or in
  what manner the product became defective.

• But plaintiff must show product was defective and “unreasonably dangerous” at time of purchase

“Unreasonably Dangerous” products

• The product was dangerous beyond the expectation of the ordinary consumer

• A less dangerous alternative was economically feasible for manufacturer, but they failed to produce it

Product defects (Restatement 3rd of Torts)

Claims that a product is “unreasonably dangerous” falls into one of these categories:

• manufacturing defects

• design defects

• warning defects

Manufacturing defect

Occurs when a product “departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product

Design Defect

Product is unreasonably dangerous
as designed even if it is manufactured correctly.

Risk-Utility Analysis

Determines whether the risk of harm from the product outweighs its utility to the user and public

Inadequate warnings examples

• Foreseeable misuses

• Content of Warning: courts a apply a “reasonableness” test to determine if the warnings adequately alert consumers to the product’s risks

• Obvious risks: No duty to warn about obvious/commonly known risks

Market-Share Liability

• Liability when multiple defendants contributed to manufacture of same defective product

• each defendant is proportionately based on its market share

Preemption

government regulations preempt product liability claim

Assumption of Risk

1. Plaintiff know & appreciated the risk created by the alleged product defect

2. Plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk even though it was unreasonable to do so

Product Misuse

1. Plaintiff was misusing the product

2. Plaintiff’s misuse was not reasonably foreseeable to the defendant

Comparative Negligence

Plaintiff’s own negligence or wrongful acts contributed to their injury

Commonly Known Dangers

A danger so commonly known that the defendant had no duty to warn plaintiff

Knowledgeable User

a danger so commonly known by particular users of the product that the defendant had no duty to warn plaintiff

Defenses to Product Liability

Statues of Limitation: Vary by state law

Statues of Repose: Place outer time limits on product liability actions