1 - Products Liability (Profoundly)

Profoundly

Products Liability (General Rule)

Under tort law, a manufacturer or seller who releases an unreasonably dangerous product into the stream of commerce is liable for harm caused by the product. In order to recover, it must be proved that the product was defective in design, manufacture, or warning, and one of four separate and distinct theories of liability must be asserted: intentional, negligence, breach of warranty, or strict liability.

Design Defect (Defect Type)

When a product is defective in design, it means that the product was produced as intended by the manufacturer, but because of its design, the product creates an unreasonable danger to consumers. However, a defense may exist where the product is unavoidably unsafe and its benefits outweigh its dangers.

Manufacture Defect (Defect Type)

When a product is defective in manufacture, it means that the product was not made as intended. Instead, due to an error in the production of the particular item at issue, the product is aberrant. Note that other products of the same type may not be defective.

Warning Defect (Defect Type)

When a product is defective in warning, its design and production are as intended, but the product poses a danger that is not apparent to the reasonable customer.

Products Liability - Intentional (Theory of Liability)

In order for the plaintiff to recover on a theory of intent (battery), the plaintiff must prove that the manufacturer, distributor, or supplier knew the product would cause harm at the time the product was released into the stream of commerce.

Products Liability - Negligence (Theory of Liability)

In order for a plaintiff to recover under a negligence theory of products liability, the plaintiff must prove duty, breach, causation, and damages.

A duty of care originally extended only to those in privity of contract, but under McPherson v. Buick, the duty was extended to all foreseeable users. To establish breach, the plaintiff must show that the product failed to meet ordinary commercial expectations. Damages are limited to personal and property.

Products Liability - Breach of Warranty (Theory of Liability)

Liability can be imposed against the manufacturer or seller of a product based upon the buyer's reliance upon an express or implied warranty that the goods are of merchantable quality or are fit for their intended purpose.

Products Liability - Strict Liability (Theory of Liability)

Strict liability may be imposed against a manufacturer or seller of a product which is defective and thereby unsafe for its anticipated use, or for failure to warn the consumer of an inherent danger involved in the use of the product when put to an intended or foreseeable use. To prevail in a products strict liability action, the plaintiff must prove:

1) manufacture or sale of the product was by defendant,
2) the product was defective,
3) the product and its defective aspects were the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries, and
4) the defect existed at the time the product left the defendant’s hands.

MacPherson v. Buick

In the landmark case of MacPherson v. Buick, Justice Cardozo dispensed with the previously applied requirement of privity of contract in products liability cases and extended the manufacturer's duty of care to include the ultimate consumer of the product, whether or not the consumer was the actual purchaser of the product. Later cases extended the duty to include not just the purchaser or the ultimate consumer, but to include all persons and property likely to be endangered by the product's probable use, such as the consumer's family or guests, or even near bystanders.