Exam 7: Strict Liability and Product Liability

Roadbuilders,Inc.,uses dynamite in its operations.Sky-Hi Fireworx,Inc.,stores explosives in its warehouses.Most likely liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any injury caused by an abnormally dangerous activity will be

BioChem Corporation,ChemCo Company,and DexLabs Inc.make and distribute toxic chemicals.In a product-liability suit against all of these parties,the court is most likely to impose market-share liability if it cannot be proved which of the parties

People who keep domestic animals can be held strictly liable for any harm inflicted by the animals.

A product liability action based on negligence does not require privity of contract between the injured plaintiff and the defendant-manufacturer.

An action in strict product liability requires that a product be in a defective condition caused by its purchaser.

ClearCall Corporation makes phones,which are sold to consumers by DefDeals stores.Erna files a product liability suit against ClearCall,alleging a design defect.In deciding whether to hold ClearCall liable,the court may consider

Garden Tool Company makes chain saws.Hadrian is injured while using a Garden Tool saw and sues the company for product liability based on negligence.To win,Hadrian must show that

Vogel bought a phone made by WiFi Communications,Inc.Three months later,after recharging the battery through a power jack,Vogel picked up the phone only to have it ignite in his hand.Suffering a severe burn,Vogel filed a suit against WiFi,alleging that a design defect in the phone weakened the connection between the power jack and the motherboard,causing the wiring to overheat and creating an unreasonable safety hazard.Could Vogel succeed on his strict product liability claim Explain.

Statutes of repose places outer times limit on product liability actions.

An injured party may sue only the manufacturer of defective products that are subject to comprehensive federal regulatory schemes.

Under a theory of market-share liability,a manufacturer sells "shares" of its potential strict liability and thereby spreads the risk and the cost.

The Prosthetic Legs and Arms Act (PLAA)sets up a no-fault compensation program for persons injured through the use of medical prostheses.The PLAA protects prosthesis makers from liability for unavoidable side effects.When Quint is injured in an auto accident,his physician prescribes and fits him for a certain prosthetic.When Quint suffers injuries from its use,he,files a suit against Replacement Limbs LLC,the maker of the prosthetic,alleging strict product liability.Is there a defense that Replacement Limbs might successfully assert in this case If so,what is it,and why

Sellers are required to take precautions against every conceivable misuse of a product.

Sea & Surf Corporation makes sailboards,which are bought and distributed by Tropical Marketing Company to UV Sports Stores,Inc.,which sells them to consumers.Wen is injured while using a Sea & Surf board that he bought from UV Sports.In a product liability suit based on strict liability,Wen may recover from

Stan,an air-conditioning and heating technician,files a suit against Temp-Set Corporation,alleging that its thermostats are unreasonably dangerous due to the possibility of electrical shock.Temp-Set's best defense is most likely

Island Breeze Company designs and makes desk,window,and ceiling fans.In a product liability suit based on negligence,Island Breeze could be liable for violating its duty of care with respect to all of the following except

Luke is playing a video game on a defective disk that melts in his game player,starting a fire that injures his hands.Luke files a suit against Mystic Maze,Inc.,the game's maker under the doctrine off strict liability.A significant application of this doctrine is in the area of

Misrepresentation in an ad is enough to show an intent to induce the reliance of anyone who may use the product.

There is a duty to warn about risks that are obvious or commonly known.

MedBeat Inc.,makes medical devices,including heart pacemakers.Nina,a heart patient,files a product liability suit against MedBeat,alleging a warning defect with respect to its pacemaker.In deciding whether to hold MedBeat liable,the court may consider whether there is a foreseeable risk of harm posed by the pacemaker and