Strict Liability - Products Liability

Question 1

In general, what is required to prevail for a claim for strict products liability?

Answer 1

1) Plaintiff was injured while using the product in the way it was intended;
2) The injury was a result of a defect in the design of the product; and
3) The plaintiff was not aware of the defect.

Question 2

What is the holding of Greenman v. Yuba Products regarding product strict liability?

Answer 2

A manufacturer is strictly liable in tort when an article that manufacturer places on the market, knowing that it is to be used without inspection for defects, proves to have a defect that causes injury to the human being.

Question 3

What are the two types of recovery for products liability?

Answer 3

1) Restatement 2nd of Torts Section 402A

2) Restatement 3rd of Torts Sections 1 and 2.

Question 4

What does Restatement 2nd of Torts Sections 402A state?

Answer 4

(1) One who sells any product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user of his property is subject to liability for physical harm thereby caused to the ultimate user or consumer, if:
(a) The seller is engaged in the business of selling such a product; and
(b) It is expected to and does reach the user or consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.

Question 5

Who does Rule 402A apply to?

Answer 5

All who are engaged in the business of selling products for use or consumption. Including manufacturers, wholesalers or retailers, or distributors, or the operator of a restaurant.

Question 6

According to 402A, what types of allergens must a seller warn of?

Answer 6

Comment J states that the seller may assume those with common allergies are aware of them. But, if a substantial number of the population is allergic, then they must give a warning against it.

Question 7

Does 402A apply even when a seller has used all reasonable care?

Answer 7

Yes. The rule will apply although:

(1) The seller has exercised all possible care in the preparation and sale of the product; and
(2) The user or consumer has not bought the product from or entered into a contract with the seller.

Question 8

What does Restatement 3rd of Torts Sections 1 state?

Answer 8

(1) One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products is subject to liability for harm to person or property caused by the defect;

Question 9

What does Restatement 3rd of Torts Section 2 state?

Answer 9

(2) A product is defect when, at the time of sale or distribution, it contains a manufacturing defect, is defective in design, or is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings. A product:
(a) Contains a manufacturing defect when the product departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product;
(b) Is defective in design when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design by the seller or distributor and the omission of the alternative design renders the product not reasonably safe;
(c) Is defective because of inadequate instruction or warnings when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the instructions or warnings renders thee product not reasonably safe.

Question 10

What does strict product liability apply to?

Answer 10

Initially, strict liability applied to foods. Now, it covers products used for intimate bodily usage. It also applies to almost all products, even those intended for animals.

Question 11

According to Restatement 3rd of Torts, what is a manufacturing defect?

Answer 11

A product contains a manufacturing defect when the product departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product;

Question 12

According to Restatement 3rd of Torts, when is a product defective in design?

Answer 12

A product is defective in design when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design by the seller or distributor and the omission of the alternative design renders the product not reasonably safe.

Question 13

According to the Restatement 3rd of torts, when does a product contain defective instructions or warnings?

Answer 13

A product is defective because of inadequate instruction or warnings when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the instructions or warnings renders thee product not reasonably safe.

Question 14

What is the test for when a product has a manufacturing defect according to Rix v. General Motors?

Answer 14

1) The defendant must be the manufacturer or seller of the product;
2) The product must be defective at the time it was sold by the defendant;
3) The product musts reach the consumer without substantial changes in its condition;
4) The defective condition of the product must be the cause (actual and proximate) of the plaintiff’s injuries.

Question 15

If a product has a manufacturing defect, is the entire product line defective?

Answer 15

No. Manufacturing defects affect only a small percentage of a product line and are flaws that occurred during the manufacturing process.

Question 16

How are manufacturing defects determined or proved?

Answer 16

The product is evaluated against the manufacturer’s own production standards. For example, comparing the defective products with other products from that line.

Question 17

What are the four methods to determining if a design defect exists?

Answer 17

1) Risk-Utility Balancing Test;
2) Risk-Utility at the time of trial;
3) Consumer Expectations about the product;
4) Risk-Utility and Consumer Expectations.

Question 18

What are design defects?

Answer 18

Imperfections or problems in the design of a product that cause the product to be unreasonably unsafe or dangerous.

Question 19

What is the Risk-Utility Balancing Analysis?

Answer 19

The jury will weigh the competing factors presented to them and reach a conclusion based on the conduct of the manufacturer.
If the risks outweigh the utility of the product, then the product line will be defective.

Question 20

What are the Risk-Utility Factors the court will consider?

Answer 20

1) The usefulness and desirability of the product;
2) The safety aspects of the product;
3) The availability of a substitute product;
4) The manufacturer’s ability to eliminate the unsafe character of the product without impairing its usefulness or making it too expensive to maintain its utility;
5) The user’s ability to avoid danger by the exercise of care in the use of the product;
6) The feasibility, on the part of the manufacturer, of spreading the loss by setting the price of the product or carrying insurance;
7) State of the Art Evidence - was the design in conformance with the best scientific technology in existence.

Question 21

What is the state of the art evidence risk utility factor most often used for?

Answer 21

It is usually used as a defense for the defendant. they use it to show that they relied on the best and most feasible technology at the time.

Question 22

What is the consumer expectations test?

Answer 22

Liability will be found when the ordinary or reasonable expectations of the consumer have been violated.
Recognizes that the failure of the product to perform safely may e viewed as a violation of the reasonable expectations of the consumers.

Question 23

What are the steps of the reasonable expectations test?

Answer 23

1) The plaintiff is required to introduce evidence that will demonstrate that the product failed to perform as safely as an ordinary/reasonable consumer would expect when using the product as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner;
2) Does the design of the product make the product dangerous to an extent beyond that which wold be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchased it when the product was used in an intended manner;
3) Generally, this does not require any evidence of ordinary consumer expectations because the finder of fact may rely on their own experiences to determine what a reasonable consumer would expect.

Question 24

What is meant when the jurisdiction requires the plaintiff to provide a “reasonable alternative design?”

Answer 24

Most jurisdictions require the plaintiff who sues for a defective product based on a design defect to provide evidence of the existence of an alternative feasible design that was available at the time the product was manufactured or sold.

Question 25

What is an information defect?

Answer 25

A product that poses an unreasonable risk of harm to a consumer can be made safe by the use of a warning informing the consumer of the danger and how to properly use the product.

Question 26

How is an information defect determined?

Answer 26

Must evaluate the Adequacy of the warning:

1) Does the warning attract the user’s attention?
2) Does the warning tell of the hazards or dangers in using the product?
3) Does the warning inform the user how the product can be used safely in order to avoid the hazards and dangers?