Term
|
Definition
| an "intentional misrepresentation" of a material fact designed to induce the person receiving the miscommunication to rely upon it to her detriment, so that a loss is suffered. |
|
|
Term
| Elements to establish fraud |
|
Definition
1. There was a "misstatement" of an important or "material fact" (false information was presented as fact)
2. there must be "scienter" = intent to defraud (intentionally deceived P)
3. Seller must know, or have reason to know, that the stmt he is making is false
4.the P must justifiably rely on the false information in making the decision to go ahead w/ the deal
5. there must be "privity" btwn the parties (parties must have been in a relationship that created a legal obligation; a 3rd party observer of fraud cannot sue)
6. Causation: a logical link existed btwn reliance on the misstatement and the losses that were then suffered by the P.
7. There must be "damages" that were caused by the fraud (even if there is fraud, if no damages result there should be no reward) |
|
|
Term
| Interference with Contractual Relations |
|
Definition
| Businesses's contractual relation were wrongfully interfered with by another party |
|
|
Term
| 3 requirements for Interference with Contractual Relations |
|
Definition
1. a contractual relationship must exist btwn the injured party and another party
2. a third party (wrongdoer) knows it exists
3. the third party intentionally interfered with that relationship |
|
|
Term
| Interference with Prospective Advantage |
|
Definition
(aka with a business relationship) a tort where there is an intentional and unjustified intervention with a relationship that a party had been developing with others in an effort to obtain new business or more business.
- trying to improve place in the mrkt by interfering w/ another's business in an unreasonable and improper manner |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| liability that producers and sellers of goods have to those injured by their products |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- it is essential in a contract case that "privity," a legal relationship, exist between the parties
- protects most manufacturers from liability for product-related injuries b/c consumers rarely buy directly from manufacturers. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- Latin for "Let the buyer beware"
- rule requires that the buyer examine, judge, and test (the product) for himself |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| - manufacturers must produce products using proper "reasonable care" to eliminate foreseeable harm, or they risk being found negligent if a consumer is injured by a defective product. |
|
|
Term
| Strict Liability (under contract law) |
|
Definition
| holds manufacturers liable to consumers injured by defective products regardless of whether the manufacturer exercised all reasonable care or not |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an assurance or guaranty, either expressed in the form of a statement by a seller of goods or implied by law, having reference to and ensuring the character, quality, or fitness of purpose of the goods. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a promise, in addition to an underlying sales agreement, that goes beyond the terms of the sales agreement and under which the promisor assures the description, performance, or quality of the goods. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an unwritten, unexpressed promise or guarantee that a court infers to exist and that accompanies a good. |
|
|
Term
| Misrepresentation about a product may be the basis for strict liability in tort |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| 4 Primary Areas of Product Liability Law |
|
Definition
1. Manufacturing Defect
2. Failure to Warn
3. Design Defects
4. Unknown Hazards |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| consumers do not expect defect, and they are compensated for it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| failure to warn consumers of dangers involved in the use of a product, or failure to instruct consumers about proper procedures in using a product |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Product has a design defect that could have been avoided and designed differently which would have prevented injury |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- aka "Latent Defects"
- dangers that were not known or not fully appreciated at the time the product was manufactured |
|
|
Term
| Joint & Several Liability |
|
Definition
| liability that a person or business either shares with other tortfeasors or bears individually. |
|
|
Term
| Defense in Product Liability Suits |
|
Definition
1. Product Misuse
2. Assumption of Risk
3. Bulk-Supplier Doctrine & Sophisticated User Defense |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| product was used for purpose for which it was not intended |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. P knew about and appreciated the risk created by the product defect
2. P voluntarily assumed the risk even though it was unreasonable to do so |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| one who sells to an intermediary in large quantities can fulfill the duty to warn ultimate users if adequate instructions are provided to the distributor or if the wholesaler or manufacturer is trained and knowledgeable of the properties of the product and safe ways to handle it, and can pass on the information to users. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| in tort law, a defense that when a manufacturer sells a product to a sophisticated buyer, such as another manufacturer, the purchaser is responsible for instructing its employees about the dangers in using the product. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| D will be liable for damages of P if performing an "ultra-hazardous activity" b/c they will always be liable for injuries "regardless of the level of care exercised in carrying out the activity" |
|
|
