Torts-Strict Liability

Card Set Information

Author:
brozovic
ID:
89287
Filename:
Torts-Strict Liability
Updated:
2011-06-20 16:47:22
Tags:
torts strict liability
Folders:

Description:
Torts-Strict Liability
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user brozovic on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Elements of Strict Liability
    Same as negligence, except replace duty with strict duty.

    • Protective Efforts.
    • --Legally irrelevant.
    • --Examiners will pack facts with protective measures.
  2. Injuries Caused by Animals
    Domesticated Animals

    --Generally no SL.

    • --Exception:
    • SL for injuries by animals with vicious propensities (usually past bite; can also be general bad demeanor), where D is aware of those propensities.

    SL never applies to trespassers to land.

    Wild Animals

    SL, no exceptions.
  3. Abnormally Dangerous Activities
    Abnormally dangerous=

    1. Activity must create foreseeable risk of serious harm even when reasonable care is exercised.

    • 2. Activity must not be a matter of common usage in community where D conducts it.
    • (crop dusting in farmland vs. suburbs)
  4. Products Liability
    • Watch the signal!
    • --Products can trigger liability under a range of theories.
    • --Signal may allude to specific theories (“P sues store for negligence.”). Only answer SL if asked (or on essays).

    4 elements:

    • 1. D must be a merchant.
    • Merchant=routinely deals in goods of this type. Issues:
    • --Casual Sellers. Not merchants; not SL (ebay sellers).
    • --Service Providers. Primary business is offering a service; not merchants of goods/tangible products that are collateral to the service (collapsed chair in doc’s waiting room (but premises liability)).
    • --Commercial Lessors. =merchants: even though they don’t part with title (rental cars).
    • --Merchant Includes Every Merchant in Dist Chain. No requirement of privity with P (but P must still be a foreseeable victim for PC purposes).

    2. There must be evidence that the product is defective.

    Manufacturing defect.

    Ok design, but actual product differs from design.

    Design defect.

    • There exists a safer, practical, and cost-effective alternative way to build the product. P must posit the alternative and show why it satisfies.
    • --Practical=would not make more difficult to use or undermine effectiveness (bladeless knife).
    • --Cost effective=a little more expensive is ok; not significantly.

    Information defect.

    Subset of design defect (because a warning (or better warning) is an alternative design). Not all warnings are equal.

    --Must eliminate physical risks where possible. Cannot warn away. This is policy consideration: get safest feasible physical design; warn of remaining risks.

    • 3. Product has not been altered since it left D’s hands.
    • --Manufacturers are not insurers for their products. If a product is tampered with, there is no SL.
    • --Proof difficulties=Presumption that if product has moved in ordinary channels of distribution, it has not been altered. D must prove otherwise.
    • --Does not apply to sale of used goods; not ordinary channels.

    • 4. P must be making a foreseeable use of product when injured.
    • --Foreseeable uses; not intended uses/misuse (standing on chair; speeding in car).
  5. Affirmative Defense to Strict Liability
    Comparative Fault
    (petting neighbor’s tiger); (using sparking Cuisinart).

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview