TORTS: Products Liability Flashcards
Strict Liability
Suppliers have a strict duty to supply safe goods. To prove a strict liability products claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant is a commercial supplier, but the product is defective, that the defective product was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury, and that plaintiff use the product in a foreseeable manner. Plaintiff can recover for physical injury or property damage but not solely for economic losses.
Commercial Suppliers
One who routinely deals in the type of products sold, including any merchant in the stream of commerce. Casual Sellers and service providers are not suppliers.
Defective Product
The defect must make the product unreasonably dangerous. There are three types of defects: manufacturing defects, design defects, and warning defects. For manufacturing defect, the product differs from others off the same assembly line and failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect. For a design defect, all products in the line are dangerous. Plaintiff must show a technologically and economically feasible alternative design or modification that would be safer as to the risk at issue. For warning defects, a manufacturer has failed to adequate adequately warn of a non-obvious risk associated with the products use, including a duty to warn a foreseeable dangerous for misuse. Plaintiff must show that the product failed to have a clear and complete warning and that the injury would not have occurred otherwise. If the products cannot be made safe for ordinary use then the manufacturer must give a proper instruction for use and adequate warnings of known dangers. Defendant is not liable for risks that were unforeseeable at the time the product was marketed.
Strict Liability Defenses
Assumption of the risk is a defense. Comparative negligence for product misuse may be a defense depending on the jurisdiction, but not if the plaint is negligence or product misuse was foreseeable. Disclaimers of liability are not effective. Compliance with industry standards is relevant but not conclusive evidence that a product is not defective.
Negligence Products Liability
Plaintiff May establish liability for a product defect under a negligence theory by proving there was a duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages. Each commercial supplier in a stream of commerce owes a duty of care to all foreseeable product users and bystanders. Breach of duty occurs when defendants negligence leads to the supplying of a defective product. Retailers and wholesalers can satisfy the duty of Care by a cursory inspection of the product. Plaintiff must show actual approximate cause. Plaintiff must show physical injury or property damage, because economic loss alone is not recoverable.
Warranty Products Liability
Plaintiffs may bring products liability claims against commercial suppliers for breaching express or implied warranties. Damages may be personal, property, or economic loss. Defenses include the assumption of risk, contributory or comparative negligence, or failure to give notice of the breach within a reasonable time under the ucc.
Express Warranty
An express warranty is any statement of material fact or promise concerning the goods. The plaintiff must show that they relied on the warranty, that the product failed to live up to the warranty, and that the breach was the actual approximate cause of their injury.
Implied Warranty
There are two implied warranties: the implied warranty of merchantability and the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. For merchantability, the seller warrants that goods are reasonably fit for their intended purpose. For fitness, if the seller knows or has reason to know the particular purpose for which a buyer is purchasing a good and knows that the buyer is relying on the seller skills or judgment in selecting the product, then the seller implies that the goods are fit for that purpose. Implied warranty protection extends to a buyer’s family household and guests who suffer personal injury.
Misrepresentation of Fact
Seller will be liable for misrepresentations of fact concerning a product when the statement was a material fact concerning the quality or uses of goods and the seller intended to induce reliance by the buyer and did in fact induce reliance. Plaintiff must prove actual cause, approximate cause, and damages. Comparative negligence can operate as a defense unless the defendant’s misrepresentation was intentional.
Intentional Products Liability
Defendant is liable if they intended the consequences or knew they were substantially certain to occur. Defenses are the same as for intentional torts, and punitive damages are allowed.
