tort law pt3 - CLASS 14: TORT LAW, PART III STRICT...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–6. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CLASS 14: TORT LAW, PART III – STRICT LIABILITY
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1. History of Strict Liability 2. Abnormally Dangerous Activities 3. Restatement Second of Torts §402A 4. Restatement Third of Torts: Products Liability 5. Manufacturing Defects 6. Design Defects 7. Defects in Instructions/Warnings 8. Defenses – Comparative Fault 9. Defenses – “State of the Art” Defense 10. Modern Application of Strict Liability – Food Products 11. Review Questions Chapter 8 2 CLASS 14: TORT LAW, PART III - STRICT LIABILITY
Background image of page 2
Strict Liability: Defendants are held liable for harm irrespective of fault. Early Cases: Owners of dangerous animals, such as bears, lions, and alligators, were held strictly liable for any damages those animals caused. Liability then expanded into “abnormally dangerous activities,” and then, most recently, products liability. Chapter 8 3 HISTORY OF STRICT LIABILITY
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Strict liability is typically imposed in cases of “abnormally dangerous activities” 1.Use and storage of explosives? Yes – a party who uses or stores explosives is generally held strictly liable for any damages that may result. 2.Crop dusting or spraying? Yes 3.Airplane Accidents? Generally no – in cases of a suit by a passenger against a carrier. It is necessary for the plaintiff to show negligence, either on the part of the pilot, the maintenance crew, the manufacturer, etc. 4.The running of a nuclear reactor? Yes 5.Toxic Chemicals and Flammable Liquids? Maybe. Transporters of gasoline and propane have often been held strictly liable for spills and explosions ( Siegler v. Kuhlman, spillage of gasoline from a truck). But some courts have denied strict liability in this situation, either on the grounds that the activity is not all that unusual , or on the grounds that the risk could be eliminated by the exercise of reasonable care. ( Indiana Harbor Belt Co. v. American Cyanamid Co., holding that a negligence standard would adequately handle the problem of spillage of flammable materials during transportation). 6.Manufacturers of Fireworks? Yes Chapter 8 4 ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITIES
Background image of page 4
§ 402A. Special Liability of Seller of Product for Physical Harm to User or Consumer (1)One who sells any product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer, or to his property, is subject to liability for physical harm thereby caused to the
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 6
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/19/2012 for the course BUL 3310 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '12 term at Florida State College.

Page1 / 16

tort law pt3 - CLASS 14: TORT LAW, PART III STRICT...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 6. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online