WA Bar Washington Torts 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Washington's Product Liability Act (WPLA, RCW 7.72) governs which categories of product liability claims?
- Only manufacturing defect claims against the original manufacturer
- Manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn claims (Correct answer)
- Only personal injury claims, excluding property damage and economic loss
- Claims against retailers only, not upstream manufacturers or designers
Correct answer: Manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn claims
The WPLA provides a comprehensive statutory framework covering all three classic defect categories: manufacturing defects, design defects, and inadequate warnings or instructions.
Question 2: Under the WPLA, what is the statute of limitations for a product liability personal injury claim?
- 2 years from the date the product injured the plaintiff
- 3 years from when the claimant discovered or reasonably should have discovered the harm and its cause (Correct answer)
- 4 years from the date the product was purchased
- 6 years from when the product was first sold to any consumer
Correct answer: 3 years from when the claimant discovered or reasonably should have discovered the harm and its cause
RCW 7.72.060 provides a three-year discovery-based statute of limitations running from when the claimant discovered or reasonably should have discovered the harm and its cause.
Question 3: Washington recognizes the tort of outrage (intentional infliction of emotional distress) when the defendant's conduct is:
- Negligent and foreseeably causes the plaintiff severe emotional distress
- Intentional or reckless, extreme and outrageous, and actually causes severe emotional distress (Correct answer)
- Merely offensive or embarrassing to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibility
- Any conduct that causes the plaintiff fear or apprehension of harm
Correct answer: Intentional or reckless, extreme and outrageous, and actually causes severe emotional distress
Washington's tort of outrage requires conduct that is intentional or reckless, extreme and outrageous beyond what civilized society would tolerate, and that actually causes severe emotional distress.
Question 4: Under Washington defamation law, what level of fault must a private plaintiff prove when the defamatory statement concerns a matter of private concern?
- Actual malice — knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth
- Specific intent to harm the plaintiff's reputation
- Negligence as to the truth or falsity of the statement (Correct answer)
- Strict liability — no fault element is required
Correct answer: Negligence as to the truth or falsity of the statement
For private figures suing on matters of private concern, Washington follows the Gertz framework and requires the plaintiff to establish at least negligence as to the falsity of the statement.
Question 5: A Washington landowner owes which duty to an undiscovered trespasser on their property?
- A duty of reasonable care under all the circumstances
- A duty to warn of all known dangerous conditions on the property
- A duty to refrain from willful or wanton conduct that injures the trespasser (Correct answer)
- No duty of any kind whatsoever to an undiscovered trespasser
Correct answer: A duty to refrain from willful or wanton conduct that injures the trespasser
Washington retains the traditional common law rule that landowners owe undiscovered trespassers only a duty to refrain from willful or wanton injury.
Question 6: In Washington, what must a plaintiff prove to establish a claim for private nuisance?
- A physical trespass or invasion of tangible particles onto the plaintiff's property
- Unreasonable and substantial interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their land (Correct answer)
- Intentional conduct — negligent or accidental interference cannot support a nuisance claim
- Interference severe enough to affect an entire neighborhood or community
Correct answer: Unreasonable and substantial interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their land
A private nuisance in Washington requires an unreasonable, substantial interference with a private person's use and enjoyment of land, and may arise from intentional, negligent, or abnormally dangerous conduct.
Question 7: Under Washington law, the 'economic loss rule' generally operates to:
- Bar all tort claims whenever a contract exists between the parties
- Bar negligence claims for purely economic losses in certain contexts absent physical injury or property damage (Correct answer)
- Apply exclusively in commercial transactions between sophisticated business entities
- Has been completely and expressly abolished by the Washington Supreme Court
Correct answer: Bar negligence claims for purely economic losses in certain contexts absent physical injury or property damage
Washington's economic loss rule bars negligence claims for purely economic losses in contexts such as construction defect disputes, channeling parties to their contractual remedies.
WA Bar Washington Torts 2
Washington's Product Liability Act (WPLA, RCW 7.72) governs which categories of product liability claims?