Term
| Strict, or Absolute, Liability |
|
Definition
| The legal responsibility for damage or injury, even if you are not at fault or negligent. Fault is irrelevant to strict liability. |
|
|
Term
| Strict Liability Limited to What Types of Activities |
|
Definition
| Strict liability is restricted to certain types of activities, such as abnormally dangerous tasks and defective manufactured products, where the risk substantially outweighs the benefit to others. |
|
|
Term
| Public Policy Objectives behind Strict Liability |
|
Definition
| Society has decided that a person engaged in certain activities should bear the (risk of) liability to people innocently injured as a consequence of dangerous or defective items or actions. |
|
|
Term
| Strict Liability vs. Negligence |
|
Definition
| Negligence may be the cause of the problem, but with strict liability, the plaintiff need not prove negligence (which may be hard to prove in these cases). |
|
|
Term
| Abnormally dangerous (ultrahazardous) instrumentalities |
|
Definition
| Activities or objects that are dangerous by thier very nature. Even if all precautions are taken, injury might still occur. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Wild animals (lions, tigers, raccoons, bees, monkeys, snakes, etc.) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Domesticated, tame animals (dogs, cats, pet birds, livestock such as pigs, cows, sheep) |
|
|
Term
| Ownership of Wild Animals |
|
Definition
| Exercise of Dominion and Control over the wild animal. Dominion = legal ownership plus full actual control over something. Control = the power or authority to direct or oversee. |
|
|
Term
| Strict Liability for Wildlife Ownership |
|
Definition
| Owners are strictly liable for injuries their wildlife inflict, regardless of whether the owner exercised every precaution to prevent injury. |
|
|
Term
| Liability for Injury by a Domesticated Animal |
|
Definition
| If a domesticated animal hurts someone, owner is liable if he was negligent in handling the animal or intentionally used the animal to hurt someone. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Owners may be held absolutely liable for injuries caused by domesticated animals that exhibit vicious tendencies = routinely displaying such characteristics as to gain a reputation for viciousness. |
|
|
Term
| Assumption of Risk (Defense in Animal Owners' Strict Liability) |
|
Definition
| If the injured party voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risk of the animal (willingly, and knew the animal was dangerous). |
|
|
Term
| Contributory or Comparative Negligence (Defense in Animal Owners' Strict Liability) |
|
Definition
| Contributory negligence may bar strict liability. Need to prove that owner was negligent in keeping the animal. |
|
|
Term
| Consent (Defense in Animal Owners' Strict Liability) |
|
Definition
| An injured plaintiff might have consented to exposure to a dangerous animal (usually based on employment responsibility working with animals). Basically the same as Assumption of Risk. |
|
|
Term
| Self-Defense and Defense of Others (Defense in Animal Owners' Strict Liability) |
|
Definition
| If the animal is used as a means of self-defense or defense of others, the owner is not strictly liable for injuries. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| These statutes may substantially affect a dog owner's liability and defenses. |
|
|
Term
| Abnormally Dangerous Activities (some) |
|
Definition
| Use of explosives, flammable substances, poisons, hazardous waste, and (in some jurisdictions) electricity, natural gas, and water supplied through unprotected utility lines. |
|
|
Term
| Absolute Liability for Abnormally Dangerous Activities |
|
Definition
| Persons engaged in abnormally dangerous activities shall be strictly liable for injuries caused by their actions. |
|
|
Term
| Criteria for Being Considered Abnormally Dangerous |
|
Definition
| An abnormally dangerous activity is an activity (1) that is not common in or (2) is not appropriate to an area, (3) that creates a high degree of risk of harm to someone or something (4) despite the exercise of due care, and (5) whose value to the community in the area is outweighed by the risk of harm |
|
|
Term
| High Risk of Substantial Injury (Element of Abnormally Dangerous Activity) |
|
Definition
| Activity creates a great threat of seriously injuring people or their property. |
|
|
Term
| Risk Cannot be Removed Through Use of Reasonable Care (Element of Abnormally Dangerous Activity) |
|
Definition
| If the TF could have eliminated the risk of harm through the use of reasonable care, the activity is not abnormally dangerous (and strict liability does not apply) |
|
|
Term
| Common Usage Principle (Element in Abnormally Dangerous Activity) |
|
Definition
| Doctrine in strict liability cases that defines abnormally dangerous activities and substances as those not commonly undertaken or used in everyday life. |
|
|
Term
| Inappropriate Use in Certain Places (Element in Abnormally Dangerous Activities) |
|
Definition
| To be ultrahazardous, the activity must have been inappropriately performed or used in the place where the victim was harmed. (dumping toxic chemicals near residential areas) |
|
|
Term
| Hazards Outweigh Benefits: Balancing Test (Element in Abnormally Dangerous Activity) |
|
Definition
| Comparing the danger created by the activity with the benefit that the community derives from the activity. |
|
|
Term
| Examples of Statutory Immunity from Absolute Liability |
|
Definition
| Statutes protecting from absolute liabilty (1) public utilities distributing electricity and natural gas, (2) private contractors performing construction work for the government, (3) zoos or parks maintaining wild animals. In these cases, plaintiffs must prove negligence or intentional torts, unless defendants have liability insurance. |
|
|
Term
| Public Policy Objectives behind Statutory Immunity |
|
Definition
| Rationale that government and companies under government contract must be protected from strict liability if certain essential activities are to be performed. (Who would keep a zoo otherwise?) |
|
|
Term
| Proximate Cause in Absolute Liability Cases |
|
Definition
| The victim must have been a foreseeable plaintiff whose injuries were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the TF's actions. |
|
|
Term
| Is the Duty of Reasonable Care relevant in strict liability cases? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When large groups of people are injured by a single incident, accident, product, exposure, or misrepresentation. Combines many legal cases into a single trial. Each plaintiff is treated like an individual with his own lawsuit, rather than as a member of a group. Large number of claims regarding a single product, with common facts and legal issues. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A lawsuit brought by an individual for himself and other persons in the same situation. To bring class action, you must convince the court that there are too many persons in the class (group) to make them all individually a part of the lawsuit and that your interests are the same as theirs so that you can adequately represent their needs. |
|
|
