Strict Liability and
Torts and Public
Policy
Mrs. Weigl
What is strict liability?
• Exception to the requirement of fault
• Means the defendant is liable to the plaintiff regardless of
fault.
• This is true in some situations even if the defendant took all
precautions necessary, liability is imposed without proof of
fault
How do I prove it?
Negligence
•
•
•
•
Duty
Breach
Causation
damages
Strict Liability
• Causation
• Damages
• Must prove to the court
that the harm caused is
the type of unreasonably
dangerous activity to
which strict liability
should be applied.
Public Policy
• Public policy and common sense require people who conduct
dangerous activities to accept responsibility for any harm they
caused, even if they were NOT negligent.
Dangerous Activity
• Applies to activities seen as unreasonably dangerous
• Considered unreasonably dangerous when they involve a risk
of harm that cannot be eliminated even by reasonable care.
• Activities may be socially useful or necessary, but because of
their potential for harm, those who engage in them are held
to the strict liability standard.
Examples
• Toxic torts
Harm resulting from the use of toxic and other hazardous
chemicals.
Industrial companies disposing of their wastes in rivers and
that resulting in illness for those exposed to such chemicals.
Animals
• Law traditionally holds owners of untamed animals
responsible for any harm caused by the animals.
• In extreme situations, a pet owner might even be held
criminally responsible for the harm caused by a pet if the
owner knows that the pet is dangerous and cannot be
controlled.
Defective Products
• Product liability- the legal responsibility of manufacturers for
injuries caused by defective products.
• The CPSC protects the public by issuing and enforcing
mandatory product standards or in some cases, banning
consumer products.
Defenses for strict liability
• You don’t have to prove fault. You have to prove causation
and damages.
• A defendant could try to show that there is no causation or
that there are no damages.
Example- A person has a heat attack and dies instantly while
driving a car with faulty brakes. That person’s family might argue
that the car manufacturer is strictly liable. However, if the defect
(the faulty brakes) did not cause the damage (the death), the
manufacturer would not be liable.
Torts, Public Policy, Reform
Torts and Public Policy
Tort Reform
• As a matter of public policy,
the tort law system should
serve to:
1. Compensate harmed
persons in a prompt and
efficient way
2. Fairly allocate benefits to
victims and costs to
wrongdoers
3. Deter conduct that is
unreasonably risky and
dangerous
• A movement to change
the process of settling
tort claims.
Strategies to change process of
settling torts
• Reduce the amount of time a plaintiff has to file a lawsuit for
damages after an injury.
- statute of limitations: requires that a tort
claim be filed within either two or three
years of when the injury is suffered.
• Limit or “cap” the amount that can be rewarded for pain and
suffering.
Frivolous lawsuits
• Cases without merit
• Example:
In1991, Richard Overton sued Anheuser-Busch for false and misleading
advertising under Michigan State law. The complaint specifically
referenced ads involving, among other things, fantasies of beautiful
women in tropical settings that came to life for two men driving a Bud
Light truck. In addition to two claims of false advertising, Mr. Overton
included a third claim in his complaint in which he claimed to have
suffered emotional distress, mental injury, and financial loss in excess of
$10,0000 due to the misleading Bud Light ads. The court dismissed all
claims.
http://www.the-injury-lawyer-directory.com/ridiculous_lawsuits.html