Strict Liability and Tort Reform

1
Strict Liability and Tort Reform
2
(No Transcript)
3

• Strict liability requires the blame be put on the
  people conducting the unreasonably hazardous
  activity
• Even harm that cannot be eliminated is required
  to be placed under strict liability
• Idea is that the company must assume risk even
  when all proper care has been established
• Disclaimers and waivers of liability for products
  are often invalidated by courts as against public
  policy

4

• The concept of strict liability is also found in
  criminal law, though to a lesser extent.
• Strict liability often applies to vehicular
  traffic offenses.
• In a speeding case, for example, whether the
  defendant knew he or she was exceeding the posted
  speed limit is irrelevant.
• The prosecutor would need only prove that the
  defendant was indeed operating the vehicle in
  excess of the speed limit.

5

• Lets look at problem 21.1
• Based on strict liability which can be claimed
• 1 yes
• 2 no
• 3 yes
• 4 - no

6

• If you have a successful case, you are entitled
  to compensatory damages, which includes your
  medical bills incurred as a result of the product
  defect, reimbursement for any time lost from
  work, and property damaged as a result of the
  defective product.

7

• If you are married and the injury has affected
  the relationship with your spouse, you may be
  entitled to loss of consortium damages

8

• Finally, if the conduct of the defendant was
  "egregious" (so awful that the courts want to
  deter the defendant and others from ever doing
  anything like that again), you may be entitled to
  punitive damages

9

• Animals owners are liable if they know the dog
  is dangerous
• Products defective products causing injuries
• US Consumer Product Safety Commission in 1972
• Strong incentive to create safe products but can
  result in higher prices for consumers

10

• Drug manufactures negligence for untested and
  unpublished results
• There are few defenses to it because the idea of
• proving negligence
• No causation
• No damages
• Product misuse

11

• Reforms rewards are high, expensive going to
  court, length of time, complicated to determine
  fault
• One main one is the idea of medical malpractice
  size of rewards and coinciding medical costs
• Recourse people with legitimate claims may not
  be able to get awards they deserve

12

• Review tomorrow Test Friday (Chapter 18-21)
  Tort, Strict Liability and Tort Reform