Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
SL - Products
Torts II - SPL
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| SL - Analytical Framework | 1. Are SL activities at issue? or SL animals? 2. Is P's harm w/in inherent risk posed by the SL activity? Or by the SL animal? 3. Is there causation? 4. Does D have any defenses? |
| SL - Activities - Ryland v. Fletcher | SL applies to "non-natural" uses of property that cause P damage. Non-natural - human alteration, other than customary uses |
| R2d 519 - SL for those who... | Carry on abnormally dangerous activity Causing harm to persons/property Even if they "exercised the utmost care to prevent the harm" |
| SL - Inherent Risk Rule | SL should be confined to consequences which lie w/in the extraordinary risk whose existence calls for such responsibility |
| SL - Causation, SL does NOT apply... | Where P's harm results from Act of God, which D had no reason to anticipate |
| SL - Defenses | Assumption of risk, Comparative negligence (some jurisdictions allow reduction if P at fault), privileges and immunities (specific exemptions) |
| Products Liability (PL) Law | Liability for commercial transfer of products that cause harm because they were defective and/or falsely represented |
| PL - Theories of Liability | Breach of warranty, misrepresentation, negligence, SL |
| PL - Negligence | Negligence-based PL claims require proof of duty, breach, causation, damages. Allows recovery for harm from seller's unreasonable product manufacture, design, or warning |
| PL - Warranty | Express Warranty - P may recover if seller misrepresents product quality Implied Warranty - P may recover if seller's product has defect, makes unfit for ordinary intended purpose |
| SPL (Products SL) - Mfg. SL when... | An article he places on the market, knowing it is to be used w/out inspection for defects, has defect, causes injury to human being |
| RS 402a - SPL | Defective condition unreasonably dangerous to consumer or property, subject to liab for phys harm caused to consum/user/ppty if: 1. Seller engaged in business of selling such prod 2. It is expected and does reach consum w/out subst change in condition |
| SPL - RS 402a - Elements | * Commercial Seller and Consumer/User * Defective product that is unreasonably dangerous * Causation * Product is expected and does reach consumer without substantial change |
| SPL - 402a Elements - Proper Parties | Proper P - Consumer/User Proper D - Commercial Seller |
| SPL - 402a Elements - Consumer/User | C/U include persons: Enjoying defective product Preparing it for use/consumption Doing work w/ defective product |
| SPL - Product Defects | Manufacturing Design Warning |
| Manufacturing Defects. The defective product... | Does not conform in some significant aspect to the intended design, nor does it conform to the great majority of products manufactured in accordance w/ that design |
| Manufacturing Defect | The product unit: Differs from others Is more dangerous AND The defect existed at the time product left D's control |
| Manufacturing Defect Considerations | * Post-sale alterations * Time passage (e.g. statutes of repose) |
| PL - Design Defects | A design defect occurs when: Intended design of the product line inadequate, needlessly dangerous |
| PL - Design Defects - Tests | * Risk-Utility * Consumer Expectations |
| PL - Design Defects - Consumer Expectations | Defective in design if dangerous to an extent beyond that contemplated by consumers w/ ordinary knowledge as to its characteristics |
| PL - DD (Design Defects) - Risk-Utility Test | If R>U = DD Where R = Risk of harm from the product as designed, and U = Utility of the product as designed |
| SPL - Elements | 1. Unreasonably Dangerous Defects 2. Causation 3. Damages 4. Affirmative Defenses |
| Risk-Utility Factors | 1. Usefulnes/desirabil to user and public 2. Safety aspects of product 3. Availabil subst 4. Ability make safe w/o impair usefulness/making expens 5. User's ability avoid dang 6. User's anticipat awaren of danger 7. Feasibility of mfg. spread loss/i |
| DD - Available Safer Alternative Design | Jurisdictions split. Most, and R3d require P to prove a safer, practical, alternative design was available to mfg at the time |
| SPL - Safer Alternatives | Jurisdictional split: Mandatory (maj. & R3d) - P MUST prove or claim fails Permissive (O'Brien) - P may prove to show low utility, while D may use to prove high utility |
| SPL - DD - State of the Art | Existing level of technological expertise and scientific knowledge of particular industy at the time product designed |
| SPL - DD - Design Defect Tests | * Consumer Expectation * Risk Utility Analysis * Hybrid Approach |
| PL - DD - Hybrid Approach | Prong 1: Consumer Expectations Test - P must prove product failed to perform as safely as ordinary consumer would expect OR Prong 2: R/U Test - If P proves product's design proximately caused injury D must then prove U>R |
| Consumer Expectation Test | A product is defective in design if it is more dangerous than the ordinary consumer would expect it to be |
| Risk-Utility Test | A product is defective in design if the risk of the product as designed is greater than the utility of the product as designed |
| Risk/Utility Factors (8) | Usefuln & Desireab to user & public, safety asp of prod, availabil of sub, abil to make safe w/out impair usefulns or too expen, user's abil to avoi dang, user's anticip awarn of dang, feasib of mfg sprd loss/insur, OTHER: ConsExp/State of Art |
| SPL - Warning Defects | Defective when commercial seller fails to provide adequate warning |
| Warning Defect General Rule | Manufacturer's obligation is to inform consumers of hazards which seller knew or should have known (KSHK) at time of manufacture and distribution |
| SL Failure to Warn, P must prove... | D's actual or constructive knowledge of product's potential risk or danger |
| SPL - State of the Art | The existing level of technological expertise and scientific knowledge available to the industry at the time the product is designed |
| Warning Defect Issues | * Obvious Hazard Doctrine * Sophisticated User Doctrine * Learned Intermediary Rule * Post-Sale (Continuing) Duty to Warn Doctrine |
| Obvious Hazard Doctrine | Seller owes NO DUTY to warn where the risk is open and obvious |
| Sophisticated User Doctrine | Exempts seller of duty to warn if buyer already knows of risk because of her expertise |
| Learned Intermediary Rule | (Pharmaceuticals) Most courts hold - Warnings/instructions may be directed to physician rather than to patient (consumer) AND Seller owes NO DUTY to warn patient |
| Post-Sale (Continuing) Duty to Warn Doctrine | Imposes duty on mfg to provide warnings to consumers about risks discovered AFTER sale |
| SPL - Warning Defects, Duty | Duty: D duty to warn - 1. risk known, should have been known, 2. unless obv hazard, soph user, learn interm excep apply |
| SPL - Warning, Adequacy | Warn must be adeq as to: Content: comprehens & give fair indic of spec risks Form: design so as to reason catch consum attent |
| SPL - Product Warnings | * ID hazards * Instruct on avoidance * Provide remedy * Gain attention |
| SPL - Causation | Factual cause - "but for" test Proximate cause: 1. Foreseeable consequences test 2. No superseding intervening forces 3. Reaches P w/out substantial change |
| SPL - Damages | P may obtain monetary damages to compensate from damage arising from physical injuries, property harms (other than harm to defective product itself) |
| SPL - Affirmative Defenses | * Implied Assump of Risk (NO express A/R - document/waiver) * Comparative Negligence (NO contributory) * Unforeseeable product misuse (NOT foreseeable misuse) * Federal preemption |
| SPL - Defenses - P's misuse of product will NOT bar recovery if... | The misuse was reasonably foreseeable |
Created by:
PrGrd
Popular Law sets