This document discusses products liability and legal theories related to defective products. It defines products liability as corporate liability for injuries caused by defective products. There are three main legal theories for products liability cases: negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability. Negligence involves failing to exercise reasonable care. Breach of warranty involves a product not being reasonably safe or conforming to express or implied warranties. Strict liability holds companies liable without a finding of fault. The document also discusses types of damages that may be recovered and when punitive damages can be awarded.
This document discusses products liability and legal theories related to defective products. It defines products liability as corporate liability for injuries caused by defective products. There are three main legal theories for products liability cases: negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability. Negligence involves failing to exercise reasonable care. Breach of warranty involves a product not being reasonably safe or conforming to express or implied warranties. Strict liability holds companies liable without a finding of fault. The document also discusses types of damages that may be recovered and when punitive damages can be awarded.
This document discusses products liability and legal theories related to defective products. It defines products liability as corporate liability for injuries caused by defective products. There are three main legal theories for products liability cases: negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability. Negligence involves failing to exercise reasonable care. Breach of warranty involves a product not being reasonably safe or conforming to express or implied warranties. Strict liability holds companies liable without a finding of fault. The document also discusses types of damages that may be recovered and when punitive damages can be awarded.
Products Liability Definition: Corporate liability for injuries or damages suffered by the user from defective products Restatement of Torts (Section 402(a)) Applies to manufacturers, sellers and distributors of goods Recoverable Damages Personal injuries Pain and suffering Past, present and Impaired future future earnings capacity Fair and adequate Property damage compensation Punitive damages Medical expenses (most states) Lost earnings Punitive Damages Awarded to Plaintiff over and above full compensation for injuries Intended to “punish” defendant and “deter” others from following the defendants example Example: Coffee spill cases Airline crashes Legal Theories “Causes of action” Legal theory under which plaintiff believes damages should be awarded Basis of courts jurisdiction Three theories in Product liability cases: Negligence Breach of Warranty Strict Liability Strict Liability Liability without fault Raw Oysters Naturally contaminated How do you prove a food product is “defective” Can foods be made risk free? Congress doesn’t think so Proximate Causation Negligence Most common cause of action in food law cases Failure to exercise reasonable care under circumstances “Prudent food processor” Contributory Negligence Duty, breach, damages “Negligence Per Se” Violation of a regulation which was designed to prevent the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff HACCP is a regulation specifically designed to prevent contamination Failure of follow HACCP may be “NPS” Breach of Warranty Manufacture liable if product was not “reasonably safe” and did not conform to an express or implied warranty Strict liability if warranty breached Express vs. Implied Warranties Express = “basis of the bargain” Implied = given by someone “in the business of selling” Effect of HACCP HACCP can be evidence that defendant took “reasonable care” Not negligence because: HACCP shows that manufacture use reasonable care Not Breach of Warranty because: Following HACCP means product means “prevailing standard of quality”