Podcast
Questions and Answers
In a strict liability claim, which element primarily shifts the focus from the manufacturer's conduct to the product itself?
In a strict liability claim, which element primarily shifts the focus from the manufacturer's conduct to the product itself?
- The manufacturer's intent to create a safe product.
- The involvement of intermediaries in the supply chain.
- The presence of a product defect that makes it unreasonably dangerous. (correct)
- The consumer's awareness of potential product risks.
A batch of coffee makers malfunctions due to a temperature control unit installed incorrectly, causing several to overheat and explode. Which type of defect is most likely the cause in a strict liability claim?
A batch of coffee makers malfunctions due to a temperature control unit installed incorrectly, causing several to overheat and explode. Which type of defect is most likely the cause in a strict liability claim?
- Design defect, because the entire product line shares a common flaw.
- Manufacturing defect, because the coffee makers deviate from their intended design due to errors during production. (correct)
- Marketing defect, if the product was marketed towards a younger demographic.
- Warning defect, due to the absence of sufficient warnings about potential risks during operation.
A car manufacturer designs a vehicle with a high center of gravity, making it prone to rollovers. Several accidents occur, resulting in injuries. What type of defect would plaintiffs most likely claim?
A car manufacturer designs a vehicle with a high center of gravity, making it prone to rollovers. Several accidents occur, resulting in injuries. What type of defect would plaintiffs most likely claim?
- Manufacturing defect, because the cars were not assembled according to specifications.
- Warning defect, for failing to warn adequately about the rollover risk.
- Design defect, as the inherent design of the vehicle makes it dangerous. (correct)
- Warranty defect, if the vehicles were still inside their warranty period.
A construction worker is injured using a power tool without wearing safety goggles, despite clear warnings on the product. If the worker sues the manufacturer, what defense might the manufacturer use?
A construction worker is injured using a power tool without wearing safety goggles, despite clear warnings on the product. If the worker sues the manufacturer, what defense might the manufacturer use?
A consumer modifies a lawnmower by removing a safety guard, subsequently injuring themselves. What defense would the manufacturer most likely use in a product liability lawsuit?
A consumer modifies a lawnmower by removing a safety guard, subsequently injuring themselves. What defense would the manufacturer most likely use in a product liability lawsuit?
A new medication is released, and despite meeting all regulatory standards, it causes unforeseen side effects in a small percentage of users. Which defense might the manufacturer use to mitigate liability?
A new medication is released, and despite meeting all regulatory standards, it causes unforeseen side effects in a small percentage of users. Which defense might the manufacturer use to mitigate liability?
How might complying with Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) regulations affect a product liability case?
How might complying with Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) regulations affect a product liability case?
In a product liability case involving a defective ladder, the plaintiff is found to be 30% responsible for their injuries because they misused the ladder. How does comparative negligence typically affect the outcome?
In a product liability case involving a defective ladder, the plaintiff is found to be 30% responsible for their injuries because they misused the ladder. How does comparative negligence typically affect the outcome?
What was the key legal principle established in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products concerning product liability?
What was the key legal principle established in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products concerning product liability?
What concept did Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. signify in the evolution of product liability law?
What concept did Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. signify in the evolution of product liability law?
Flashcards
Strict Liability
Strict Liability
Responsibility for damages caused by defective products, regardless of fault.
Product Defect
Product Defect
A flaw that makes a product unreasonably dangerous.
Manufacturing Defect
Manufacturing Defect
When one or a few products are flawed due to errors in the production process.
Design Defect
Design Defect
Signup and view all the flashcards
Warning Defect
Warning Defect
Signup and view all the flashcards
Misuse of Product
Misuse of Product
Signup and view all the flashcards
Alteration of Product
Alteration of Product
Signup and view all the flashcards
Assumption of Risk
Assumption of Risk
Signup and view all the flashcards
State-of-the-Art Defense
State-of-the-Art Defense
Signup and view all the flashcards
Comparative Negligence
Comparative Negligence
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
- Strict liability and product liability focus on holding manufacturers or sellers responsible for damages from defective products, regardless of fault.
- Strict liability differs from negligence because it is not necessary to prove the manufacturer or seller acted carelessly; the focus is on the product's defectiveness.
Elements of Strict Liability
- Defect: The product must have a defect that makes it unreasonably dangerous. Defects usually fall into manufacturing defects, design defects, or warning defects (failure to warn).
- Causation: The defect must be the direct and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury, establishing a clear link between the defect and the harm.
- Unreasonable Danger: The product's defect must pose an unreasonable danger to consumers, exceeding what an ordinary consumer would expect.
Types of Defects
- Manufacturing Defects: Occur when a product deviates from its intended design during manufacturing, resulting in flaws in one or a few products due to production errors.
- Design Defects: Exist when an entire product line is inherently dangerous due to a flawed design, requiring proof of a safer, economically feasible alternative design that could have prevented the injury.
- Warning Defects (Failure to Warn): Arise when a manufacturer fails to provide adequate warnings or instructions about potential risks associated with using the product.
Defenses in Product Liability
- Misuse of Product: The manufacturer may not be liable if the consumer used the product in an unforeseeable or unintended way.
- Alteration of Product: The manufacturer may not be liable if the product was changed after leaving the manufacturer's control, and this alteration contributed to the injury.
- Assumption of Risk: Recovery may be barred under the assumption of risk doctrine if the consumer knew about the product's defect and voluntarily used it.
- State-of-the-Art Defense: The manufacturer argues the product was made using the best technology and scientific knowledge available at the time of production.
- Compliance with Government Standards: Compliance with government regulations or standards can be used as a defense, but it is not always a complete bar to liability.
Consumer Safety Regulations
- Government agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) regulate product safety and can issue recalls for defective products.
- These regulations set minimum safety standards for various products to help prevent injuries.
- Compliance with these regulations can serve as evidence of due care but does not eliminate liability.
Comparative Negligence
- Comparative negligence principles may apply in product liability cases, reducing the plaintiff's recovery if their negligence contributed to the injury.
- The amount of recovery is reduced by the percentage of the plaintiff’s fault.
Case Law Examples
- These cases show how courts have applied strict liability principles in practice, providing insight into defects and injuries that can lead to liability.
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products: Established strict liability in tort for defective products.
- Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co: Signified a move toward strict liability; manufacturer should be responsible for injuries caused by defective products.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
