Strict and Products Liability Flashcards

A manufacturer sells a power saw with a blade guard that can be easily removed without tools. A user removes the guard and is injured. Under strict products liability, which factor most favors the manufacturer?

Answer: The user's removal of the guard was an unforeseeable misuse

If removing the guard was an unforeseeable misuse, strict products liability may not apply because liability requires the product to be used in a reasonably foreseeable manner.

Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, which of the following sellers is NOT subject to strict products liability?

Answer: A casual seller who occasionally sells used goods

Strict products liability under § 402A applies only to sellers engaged in the business of selling the product; a casual or occasional seller is not subject to strict liability.

A plaintiff sues a drug company under strict products liability for a prescription drug that caused serious side effects. The drug carried appropriate warnings to physicians. Under the learned intermediary doctrine, the court will most likely:

Answer: Find the manufacturer's duty to warn was satisfied by warning the prescribing physician

Under the learned intermediary doctrine, a drug manufacturer fulfills its duty to warn by providing adequate warnings to the prescribing physician rather than directly to the patient.

A consumer purchases a bottle of soda that explodes in her hand due to excessive carbonation pressure. She sues the bottler under strict liability. The bottler argues the bottle was inspected and met industry standards. This defense is:

Answer: Invalid, because strict liability does not require proof of negligence

Strict products liability does not require proof of negligence, so compliance with industry standards is not a complete defense.

A child is injured by a toy that was safe for ages 8 and older but was marketed to children of all ages without age warnings. This is best characterized as a:

Answer: Warning defect (failure to warn)

Marketing a product to an inappropriate audience without adequate age-based warnings constitutes a failure-to-warn defect.

Under strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, which element is NOT required?

Answer: The defendant acted negligently in conducting the activity

Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities does not require negligence — liability attaches regardless of the care taken.

A pet store sells a monkey that bites a customer a week after purchase. The customer sues under strict liability for wild animal ownership. The store argues the monkey had never bitten anyone before. This defense is:

Answer: Invalid because strict liability applies to wild animals regardless of prior behavior

Strict liability for wild animal ownership does not require knowledge of prior dangerous behavior — the one-bite rule applies to domestic animals, not wild animals.