Term
|
Definition
| security guard; Birkner test for scope of employment vicarious liability: 1) conduct of kind hired to perform, 2) conduct occur substantially within work hours and spatial boundaries of employment, 3) conduct motivated at least in part by serving employer's interest |
|
|
Term
| Restatement of Agency 7.07 |
|
Definition
| agent when intended by employee to serve purpose of employer (stricter than Birkner test) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| liability for independent contractors' torts if acting with apparent authority of hospital (jury Q) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| independent contractor liable if reasonable belief that services are being rendered by employer or his servants (stricter standard than apparent agency) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Introduced idea of fault- tort/negligence claims require P to show D acted carelessly |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Boy electrocuted for wire; No duty if harm not foreseeable in light of utility of conduct (P in BPL equation) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Wires hurt carpenter on empty lots & court imposed duty because reasonable to expect it to be dangerous on vacant lot |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| flour on barge; duty to exercise reasonable care if burden of precaution < probability of occurrence * seriousness of accident |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Diminished mental ability not an exception to reasonable person standard |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Sudden mental illness not an exception to reasonable person standard in same way sudden physical illness is; anything short of total consciousness is not a defense |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| People must exercise reasonable care in accordance with their "superior" attributes |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| swerved to avoid accident and hit someone else; a person confronting an emergency not of his making is required to exhibit only an honest exercise of judgment |
|
|
Term
| Bethel v. NYC Transit Authority |
|
Definition
| wheelchair seat collapsed; changes standard of care for common carriers from extraordinary care to ordinary care for all reasonable common carriers |
|
|
Term
| Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Goodman |
|
Definition
| driving across tracks (Holmes case); judges should determine standard of care for negligence cases |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| couldn't see but crossed railroad tracks; without the guide of custom, the jury should determine if reasonable care is exercised |
|
|
Term
| Andrews v. United Airlines |
|
Definition
| briefcase fell on plane; whether D's conduct (a warning) meets reasonable care is a question for the jury to consider |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| tenant fell through glass door; custom can help establish the standard of due care, but jury must decide whether custom is reasonable and whether departure from custom is reasonable |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| chiropractor performed what not licensed to do; jury was not to be told he was unlicensed, but this changed in 1971 with CPLR 4504(d), in which personal injuries against one not authorized to practice medicine are prima facie evidence of negligence |
|
|
Term
| Edwards v. Basel Pharmaceuticals |
|
Definition
| nicotine patches; manufacturer's duty to warn not necessary satisfied by meeting minimum warning requirements (left to common law, not statute) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| migrant farm workers were killed by insecticide despite clear warnings adhering to statute. Manufacturer still liable because could have foreseen people using it wouldn't be able to read English |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| driving without headlamps (Cardozo); violation of a statute is negligence per se, unless there is an excuse for the violation (i.e. similar to prima facie negligence) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| walking left side of road as per statute; violating a safety statute is negligence per se, but violating a statute that just codifies conduct under normal circumstances is not negligence when the unusual occurs |
|
|
Term
| De Haen Radiator v. Rockwood Sprinkler |
|
Definition
| radiator fell & hurt man; a violation of a statute specifying the kind of harm to be avoided is sufficient for liability if the harm intended to be prevented occurred and can be read into it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| jars on floor for a while; As a matter of law, a jury can reasonably decide that 50 minutes is a sufficient amount of time for a store to discover and remedy the dangerous situation, and circumstantial evidence can be used to establish the time elapsed between the creation of the situation and the accident. |
|
|
Term
| Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History |
|
Definition
| wax paper on museum steps; no constructive notice when no evidence of how long dangerous condition existed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| barrell falls from window; creates doctrine of res ipsa loquitor: a rebuttable inference/presumption of negligence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hotel staff learned stuff thrown out windows; hotel can be liable only if knew it was happening but didn't try to stop it, since the accident could have happened without the hotel's negligence (i.e. the guests could have been negligent) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| chair flew out of hotel; no presumption of negligence because there was no way the hotel could have known about the chair flying out of window, so court cannot make inference of negligence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| tire rolled out of truck and hurt car behind; res ipsa can be inferred when the D controlled the vector of harm and the accident wouldn't have occurred but for failure to exercise reasonable care. A lack of evidence on the P's side doesn't defeat the claim |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| surgery and woke up with paralyzed arm; res ipsa can be applied to a group of defendants who were in position of superior knowledge, even if P cannot point to instrument of harm (possibly abuse of res ipsa since there was an inference without an exact party who was negligent) |
|
|
Term
| Sheeley v. Memorial Hospital |
|
Definition
| Dr. Leslie knows too much compared to 2nd yr resident; Overturns similar locality rule in governing admissibility of expert testimony in med mal; expert just has to have the appropriate background |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ovarian cyst removed but arm injured; when common knowledge is lacking, expert testimony can educate the jury on the standard of care needed to make a judgment on whether injury would have happened without negligence (i.e. whether res ipsa can be inferred) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| doesn't tell about surgery for broken hip; medical provider needs to give patients information material to information decisions according to standard of care and custom (material if person in P's position would consider the info material); disregards previous standard (only provide info for alts if invasive procedure) |
|
|
Term
| NJ Supreme Court 2007 abortion case |
|
Definition
| doctor had no legal duty to inform patient who sought abortion about her unique embryo, even if she would not have had the abortion if she had known about it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| P injured from uterine device and doctor failed to warn when he learned 2 years later that it was dangerous; doctor liable for failure to warn when creates dangerous situation without knowledge and later learns of the danger |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| duty to exercise due care to prevent a physical risk that is unknown at time of original action once actor realizes or should have realized the risk |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| parent has duty to exercise reasonable care to control minor cild to prevent child from intentionally harming others if parent 1) knows or should know how to control child and knows/should know of necessity and opportunity to exercise that control |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| guest jumps off boat and paralyzed; superior knowledge of dangerous condition by itself without duty to provide protection or a special relationship is not enough to establish liability in negligence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| friend beat up, died, and left in car; duty arises if one worsens a situation by undertaking affirmative actions to render aid or if special relationship of friends in a common undertaking |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a relationship imposes a duty to exercise reasonable care in protecting a 3rd party victim if D has special relationship to a person whose conduct needs to be controlled |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| duty not to misrepresent if D negligently gives false information to another if person reasonably relied and suffered physical harm, or to a 3rd person that the actor should reasonably expect to be put in peril by action undertaken |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| liable for physical harm to 3rd parties if give chattel to someone who could be reasonably foreseen to use it in unreasonable way (e.g. youth, inexperience, etc.) to subject others to risk of harm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| minor drank and drown; social host liable to minor who is actually harmed when statute enacted to prohibit giving alcohol to minors is meant to protect the minors |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| husband dies when getting drunk at party; social host has no liability for harm to adult if adult dies from alcohol |
|
|
Term
| Randi W v. Muroc Joint Unified School District |
|
Definition
| letter of recommendation; If decide to say something about another, has duty to not misrepresent the facts in describing the qualifications and character of that person if making these misrepresentations would present a substantial, foreseeable risk of physical injury to third persons |
|
|
Term
| Tarasoff v. Regents of UCLA |
|
Definition
| Poddar told doc he would kill Tarasoff; psychologist/patient relationship creates a duty to warn identifiable foreseeable potential victims of patient's conduct (application of Restatement 315); i.e. no duty to control or warn of another's conduct unless special relationship to dangerous perosn or potential foreseeable victim |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| drunk kid hurts someone; social host has no duty to protect a third party injured by an intoxicated minor even if violate statute (only duty to minor himself) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| aunt gave nephew money to buy car even though knew he was bad driver; extends negligent entrustment doctrine (i.e. duty arises when you give something to someone and you know/should know that giving that thing to that person is dangerous/foolish |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| doc told woman she didn't have Hep C and she gave it to husband; a third party's existence must be known at time of negligence (woman did not yet meet husband) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| doctor has duty to protect plaintiff who contracted HIV from doctor's patient since doctor waited five years to tell patient about HIV status |
|
|
Term
| Strauss v. Belle Realty Co. |
|
Definition
| power outage and tenant falls and gets hurt and sues electric company; if imposing duty would define overly broad orbit of duty, court can deny duty on basis of lack of privity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Cardozo didn't hold water company liable for its negligently burning a warehouse that messed up water pressure. Cardozo says it was an omission, not a commission, so no liability (no policy argument a la Strauss is made) |
|
|
Term
| Uhr v. East Greenbush Central School District |
|
Definition
| school didn't test for scoliosis as per statute; 3 party Sheehy test to determine if statute creates private right of enforcement: 1) enacted for P's class, 2) private enforcement would promote legislative purpose, 3) consistent with legislative scheme |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| extends liability to licensees for failure to carry on activities with due care if and only if occupier should expect licensees would not discover/realize the danger and they have no reason to know of the risks involved |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| CA eliminated distinction between invitee and licensee and replaced with ordinary negligence standards |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| social guest injured from flaming Irish coffee; duty of reasonable care to licensee whose presence is/should be known |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| robbed at Wal-Mart parking lot; business owners have duty to protect patrons from criminal acts of 3rd parties when foreseeability of crime risk and gravity of harm are both high compared to burden of imposing liability (determined by looking at previous instances of crime- balancing test) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| teller refused to comply with robber and robber shot customer; teller no duty to obey robber's commands |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| landowner liable for children (under 18) trespassing caused by artificial condition on land when 1) knows kids likely to trespass, 2) landowner knows unreasonable risk to kids, 3) children too young to discover condition/risk, 4) utility of maintaining safety is slight compared to kids' risk |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| bible study slips on ice; no duty to protect against unknown conditions on one's property when the P is licensee from whom the landowner derives no benefit and land not open to public |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Santa Claus guy slips on way to talk to hospital employee; imposes standard of reasonable care to all nontrespassors (eliminates invitee/licensee distinction). Reasonable care depends on foreseeability of harm, purpose of entering property, circumstances of entering property, use of premises, burden of repair/warning |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Institutionalized kid can't sue parents |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Minor child can't sue dad for beating him |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| minor child can't sue dad for rape |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| parents are immune if alleged negligent act involves an exercise of parental authority over child or exercise of ordinary parental discretion with respect to provision of food, clothing, housing, medical/dental services, and other care |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Similar to Goller; affords protection to parents charged with negligent supervision; i.e. if supervising, immunity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| child wanders into hot tub and burned; interprets Holodok to protect parents who create dangers as well as those who fail to protect kids against dangers |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| child born alive sues mother for injuries sustained when pregnant and mom didn't cross street in crosswalk and was hit; can can sue for "catastrophic" injuries sustained before birth |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| mother left 2.5 year old by pool and drowned; overrules Sandoval and Goller and adopts reasonable parent standard; parent not immune for tortious conduct, but will not be liable if acted like a reasonable and prudent parent would under circumstances |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| drunk girl dies in woods when cops don't come; duty between government and victim only when direct 911 communication with victim and reliance by victim |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| school district not immune when kid skips school and gets hit by bus as long as school acted reasonably to insure kids stayed on premises |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| school district immune when kid hit by bus after school hours |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| school district not immune when bus lets kid off before the other buses left and violated its own school policy |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| school has no duty to teach kid how to read since other factors involved |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no duty for transit authority when woman raped in subway tunnel since primarily a government act |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no duty to 3rd party plaintiff attacked in subway |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no government liability for discretionary functions (where government has choice with policy considerations) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| woman threatened by ex and gets lye thrown in face; no tort liability for police protection to members of the public |
|
|
Term
| Schuster v. City of New York |
|
Definition
| FBI asked for help and informant murdered; police have duty to protect people when the police create the dangerous situation and the victim relies on police protection |
|
|
Term
| Sorichetti v. City of New York |
|
Definition
| husband mutilates child; police have duty to respond when victim has reason for reliance (protective order) and when police have knowledge of dangerous situation |
|
|
Term
| Cuffy v. City of New York |
|
Definition
| downstairs neighbors attacked; police have no duty to provide protection unless special relationship exists (1) promise of affirmative duty, 2) knowledge that inaction could lead to harm, 3) direct contact, 4) justifiable reliance) |
|
|
Term
| Lauer v. City of New York |
|
Definition
| autopsy says dad killed kid; to sustain liability against a municipality, the duty breached must be more than that owed to the public generally, even if the act was ministerial |
|
|
Term
| Friedman v. State of New York |
|
Definition
| median barrier not constructed; no liability for a transportation authority's discretionary act, but if failure to effectuate a plan to remedy a dangerous condition within a reasonable time, liability may exist |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| car going around curve and no sign put up; to be a discretionary act, it must be grounded in social, political, or economic policy concerns. A failure to follow a statute is a ministerial act for which there is no immunity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| horse stop before preggy woman; no liability for emotional harm if no physical impact |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| dust in someone's eye and scared; court allowed recovery because of impact. Demonstrates chipping away of impact rule |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| woman sees car hit hubby; recovery for emotional injury when D's negligence causes reasonable fear of immediate personal injury that results in bodily harm or sickness (overturns no impact rule) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| recovery for emotional injury if sustain physical impact as result of D's negligent conduct or placed in immediate risk of physical harm leading to legitimate fear that it could hurt P |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| asbestos case; can recover if more likely than not the person will develop cancer in future |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| kid stuck in elevator; relative can recover for emotional injury even if not in zone of danger if: 1) proximity to scene of accident, 2) shock resulted from sensory & contemporaneous observance of accident, 3) close familial relationship, and 4) severe physical injury or death resulted |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| head in elevator; no emotional distress recovery for people in elevator because no close relationship required in Dillon/Portee |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no recovery for emotional distress if see only consequences of accident but not accident itself |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no recovery for property damage because not built with his own hands |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| recover for emo distress for property damage if property built by own hands |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| worker exposed to asbestos; no recovery for exposure to toxic substance without physical symptoms because zone of danger test requires fear of immediate traumatic harm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| baby abducted from hospital; hospital has no duty to prevent INDIRECT emotional harm to parents from abduction of baby |
|
|
Term
| Gammon v. Osteopathic Hospital |
|
Definition
| bloody leg; recovery allowed for psychic harm if reasonably foreseeable/expected to befall the ordinarily sensitive person |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| account bad report; applies Rest. 552: must show 1) actual knowledge on part of D that limited parties would rely on report, and 2) P must know D had actual knowledge of particular financial transaction that hurt P |
|
|
Term
| 532 Madison v. Finlandia Center |
|
Definition
| buildings collapse; no recovery for purely economic loss for indeterminate class of people harmed (must show personal injury or property damage to recover) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| low cost airline terminal closed due to fire; only parties who will particularly be foreseeably hurt can recover for economic damage, not passerbys or shoppers |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| defective baby conceived after tubes tied; if unwanted/healthy child, no damages for emo distress or rearing costs. If unwanted/unhealthy, recoup special medical/educational expenses above regular rearing costs and if doc had reasonable expectation kid would be born handicapped, recover all rearing costs and emotional distress |
|
|
Term
| Stubbs v. City of Rochester |
|
Definition
| typhoid water poisoned people; if several possible causes of P's injury, P must show with reasonable certainty (>51%) that that D's conduct caused the injury |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| two parties start fire, either one of which would have "but for" caused the house to burn down; substantial factor test to determine whether D's fire was cause of harm, since but for test would not work |
|
|
Term
| Frye test for expert testimony |
|
Definition
| expert testimony "generally accepted" by scientific community is admitted |
|
|
Term
| Federal Rules of Evidence |
|
Definition
| allows testimony when witness is qualified and will help trier of fact understand or determine fact in issue |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| morning sickness drug; trial judges must decide if expert testimony is reliable and relevant; rejects Frye test and makes trial judges gatekeepers: 1) whether theory testable according to scientific method, 2) subject to peer review, 3) has known/potential rate of error, and 4) whether generally accpeted |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| negligently prescribed double dosage of danocrine and P died from PPH but got pregnant, which made PPH worse; when but for causation can't be proven, can establish instinct of cause if the negligent act increases the chance of a particular accident and the accident happened (burden then shifts to D to show his action wasn't cause) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| two people shot at P and couldn't tell who hit him; when 2 or more Ds commit substantially similar negligent acts, one of which caused P's injury, burden shift to Ds to exculpate selves |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| negligent OB and pediatrician; court finds both OB and pediatrician responsible for 100% of harm regardless of percentage of fault |
|
|
Term
| Garcia v. Joseph Vince Co |
|
Definition
| P injured by defective saber but couldn't tell which manufacturer; no alternative liability when only one D is negligent and can't tell which one |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| DES injured a bunch of mothers; market share analysis to determine recovery from multiple possible Ds when but for causation can't be found |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| heart attack after rear-ended; eggshell plaintiff rule: negligent D liable for full extent of P's harm even if the harm is not foreseeable and not the extent of harm an ordinary person would suffer |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| negligent actor subject to liability for harm to another although a physical condition of victim makes injury greater than could've been reasonable foreseen |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| boy grabs wire to stop fall; jury Q as to whether victim would have died but for the D's actions. If woulda died anyway, less or no recovery. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| kid exhibits schizophrenia after car accident; if jury finds accident precipitated existing illness, D can be liable but the existence of a prior problem may reduce damages |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| drops plank and ship explodes; D liable for all direct consequences of negligence, even if not foreseeable (NOT GOOD LAW ANYMORE) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| oil spilled on water; overrules Polemis: D liable only for foreseeable and probable consequences of negligent act |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| raped by person on D's property; scope of risk test: for D to be liable when superseding cause, harm suffered must be of the same general type as that which makes D's conduct negligent in first place (if intervening act totally/wholly unforeseeable, causal chain is broken) |
|
|
Term
| Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad |
|
Definition
| no liability when victims of negligence are unforeseeable |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| brain injured man shoots P; Ds not liable for harm to unexpected victims when too much time (7 years) elapses between the alleged negligent act and the harm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ice in water causes ships to crash; negligent D cannot avoid liability just because another negligently failed to act that would have prevented the harm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| doctor botches drunk driver's surgery and kills him, claiming comparative negligence; comparative negligence doesn't allow exculpation of a doctor's negligence when performing surgery on a plaintiff who was injured by his own negligence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| religious convictions not an acceptable excuse not to mitigate damages (didn't accept blood transfusion b/c religion) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| injured at ski resort but signed waiver; express assumption of risk not permitted when it goes against public interest when negligence, rather than an inherent risk, causes injury. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| risk is not voluntary if D's tortious conduct has left P no reasonable alternative to protect himself |
|
|
Term
| Murphy v. Steeplechase Amusement Co. |
|
Definition
| flopper case; flopper case; one who takes part in an activity accepts the obvious and necessary dangers of that activity (i.e. volenti non fit injuria) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the party invoking the exculpation 1) is of a type suitable for public regulation, 2) provides a service of great importance to the public, 3) is willing to perform the service for any member of the public who seeks it, 4) has a decisive advantage in bargaining strength, 5) uses a standardized adhesion contract of exculpation with no provision for an increase in fees to obtain protection from negligence, and 6) takes control over the plaintiff or his/her property |
|
|
Term
| Davenport v. Cotton Hope Plantation |
|
Definition
| P complained about broken stair lights but still walked up them; P assumes risk if: has knowledge of facts constituting dangerous condition, 2) knows condition is dangerous, 3) appreciates nature/debate of dangerous, and 4) voluntarily exposes himself to danger |
|
|
Term
| Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. |
|
Definition
| catheter manufacturer sued but federal statute pre-empts different state requirements; pre-emption clause enacted in a fed statute that bars state requirements bars state statutory claims as well as state common law claims. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| one who carries on an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to liability for harm resulting from the activity, although he has exercised the utmost care to prevent harm |
|
|
Term
| Abnormally dangerous as defined by 520 (2d) |
|
Definition
| 1) high degree of risk of harm, 2) great likelihood of harm, 3) inability to eliminate risk by reas. care, 4) extent to which activity is not matter of common usage, 5) inappropriateness of activity to place where it is carried on, 6) extent to which value to community not outweighed by dangerous attributes |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| D's reservoir shaft bursts and P's coal mine and people harmed; strict liability for all foreseeable natural consequences of what a D brings onto his land ("escaped mischief" rule). Rylands II: liable for harm caused by non-natural uses of land |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| lawfully blasted tree, but wood injured P 412 feet away; strict liability for injuries caused to people on neighboring land even if use of property is lawful |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
steam boiler accidentally exploded and damaged property; no strict liability because accidental event (distinguished from
Sullivan, where blasting was intentional) |
|
|
Term
| Indiana Harbor Belt RR v. American Cyanamid |
|
Definition
| transporting acrylonitrile; no strict liability when risk can be eliminated through use of due care |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hot air balloon landing; imposing strict liability proper for economic concerns to prevent parties from escaping liability when negligence won't work |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| defective tire sold but would have discovered defect if inspected; If a product is reasonably expected to be dangerous if negligently made and the product is known to be used by those other than the original purchaser in the normal course of business, a duty of care exists; the previous requirement for privity is nullified. |
|
|
Term
| Traynor's concurrence in Escola v. Coca-Cola Bottle Co. |
|
Definition
| waitress injured when Coke bottle broke in hand; Traynor's concurrence: manufacturer strictly liable when it places item on market knowing it will be used without inspection and has a defect that causes injury |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| both Ford and retailer strictly liable when car malfunctioned (both have to inspect) |
|
|
Term
| Elmore v. American Motors Co. |
|
Definition
| American Motors liable to bystanders hit by defective car for policy reasons |
|
|
Term
| Greenman v. Yuba Power Products |
|
Definition
| warranty approaches not appropriate because too technical; strict liability is preferred to hold manufacturers liable |
|
|
Term
| Restatement 3rd of Products Liability |
|
Definition
| strict liability for manufacturing defects, and risk/utility analysis for design defects or inadequate instructions/warnings |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Strict liability to anyone who sells a product with defective condition unreasonably dangerous to end consumer/user if seller engaged in business of selling the product and it's expected to and does reach consumer without substantial change in condition, even if non-negligent and no privity |
|
|
Term
| Barker v. Lull Engineering |
|
Definition
| high lift loader overturned on slope; defective design if 1) the product failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used in an intended or reasonably foreseeable manner, or 2) if the jury finds “excessive preventable danger,” or in other words, that the risk of danger inherent in the challenged design outweighs the benefits of such design (considering the gravity of danger of the current design, the likelihood of such danger, the mechanical feasibility of a safer design, the cost of a safer design, the adverse consequences to the product and consumer of the safer design) |
|
|
Term
| Camacho v. Honda Motor Co. |
|
Definition
| P injured in motor cycle accident with no crash bar to protect legs; rejects consumer expectations test and adopts risk/utility test with Ortho factors (balances risks/benefits of product to see if design is unreasonably dangerous). Also adopts crashworthiness doctrine: liability for enhanced injuries when design defect not cause of accident |
|
|
Term
| Soule v. General Motors Corp. |
|
Definition
| ankles crushed in car accident b/c wheel bracket torn loose; use risk/utility test when product is complex and can't infer that design performed below legitimate, accepted safety assumptions of consumers |
|
|
Term
| Cronin v. JBE Olson Corp. |
|
Definition
| manufacturer strictly liable if defect and defect caused injuries; doesn't matter if "unreasonably dangerous" as defined by 402(a) |
|
|
Term
| Ortho risk/utility factors (as used in Camacho) |
|
Definition
| 1) usefulness/desirability of product, 2) safety aspects of product, 3) availability of substitute, 4) manufacturer's ability to eliminate unsafe character of product without impairing usefulness, 5) user's ability to avoid danger through due care, 6) user's anticipated awareness of inherent dangers, 7) feasibility of spreading loss through price increase or insurance |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| air bag explodes in low impact collision; GM wins because of risk/benefit analysis |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| VW bus crashed into tree and P argued design put people so close to front of vehicle; D wins b/c when unique design is selling point, can't compare to other vehicles |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| paralyzed when jumps into above ground pool; strict liability approach where jury gets to determine if risks of injury outweigh utility of product |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| miter saw used without guard even though warning; manufacturer has no duty to warn of all possible resulting injuries and severity of consequences that result from warned-against product modifications |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| no duty to warn of "manifest danger" of riding in back of pick-up truck |
|
|
Term
| Pittman v. Upjohn test for warnings |
|
Definition
| Warning must 1) indicate scope of danger, 2) seriousness of harm, 3) adequate to alert reasonable person to danger, 4) indicate consequences from failure to follow, 5) conveyance of warning must be adequate |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| jury Q to decide if common knowledge that marshmallows expand in lungs and if this poses risk to young children |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| mixing hairstyle products causes facial damage; jury Q on adequacy of warning |
|
|
Term
| Edwards v. Basel Pharmaceuticals |
|
Definition
| nicotine patches and smoking; instances where FDA has mandated warning to be provided to consumer is an exception to the learned intermediary doctrine |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| woman died after taking prescription; manufacturers of prescription drugs are subject to the same duty to warn customers about the risks of their products as other manufacturers (eliminates learned intermediary doctrine) |
|
|
Term
| Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Co. |
|
Definition
| breast implants; manufacturer has no duty to warn about risks not reasonably foreseeable at time of sale/couldn't be discovered by reasonable testing. Manufacturer held to standard of expert in that field and has to warn if risks discovered after sale |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| even if manufacturer didn't know of a risk but could have known will be held strictly liable for harm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| reverses Beshada; regarding design and warning, 402(a) does not require warnings about unknowable risks or impose liabilty for injuries from such risks |
|
|
Term
| General Motors Corporation v. Sanchez |
|
Definition
| truck rolled backwards and bled to death; consumer has no duty to discover or guard against a product defect, but a consumer’s conduct other than the mere failure to discover or guard against a product defect is subject to comparative responsibility (i.e. if P negligent in not taking precautions) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hand crushed in printing press; if product safe when sold, manufacturer not liable for injuries that resulted from 3rd party modification, even if modification is foreseeable |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| meat grinder guard removed; even if substantial modification, injured party can sue for failure to warn of dangers of modification unless injured party had actual knowledge of danger or it was open and obvious |
|
|
Term
| Scarangella v. Thomas Built Buses |
|
Definition
| manufacturer not liable when bus backed into D because employer made decision not to buy screaming alarms on buses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| court does not apply assumption of risk to employees who are hurt by fertilizer loader that employer removed guards from, since employee required to encounter risk, even if employer signed agreement assuming manufacturer's risk |
|
|
Term
| Seffert v. LA Transit Lines |
|
Definition
| caught in bus door; appellate court can overturn damage award if shocks conscience so much that verdict must have been result of passion or prejudice |
|
|
Term
| Example of a single judgment approach |
|
Definition
| skull falls out but already got award; can't go back and get another damage award! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| med mal left P in coma; cognitive awareness required for recovery for loss of enjoyment of life (no separate categories for loss of enjoyment of life and pain/suffering) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| drunk driving punitive damages; intent to cause harm not required for punitive damages if conscious disregard for safety of others |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| BMW damages by acid rain but sold as new; factors for calculation of punitive damages: degree of reprehensibility, ratio of compensatory to punitive, and sanctions for comparable misconduct |
|
|
Term
| State Farm Insurance v. Campbell |
|
Definition
| State Farm wanted to take bad case to trial; reprehensibility factor of Gore cannot take into account out of state conduct and generally should be limited to single digit multiplier of compensatory damages |
|
|
Term
| Phillip Morris v. Williams |
|
Definition
| broader reprehensibility outlok than State Farm; looks at conduct broadly across spectrum of D's actions, not just toward individuals, so high punitive damages ($30 million of pun v, $800,000 compensatory) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| wrongful death of child; NJ took into account what child would have done for parents into damages award |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| strict liability if 1) abnormally dangerous, 2) uncommon usage, 3) inappropriate place, 4) risk not eliminated through reasonable care |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| distinction between speedier product v. machine that doesn't work effectively (liability even if modify latter) |
|
|
