Education Quarterly Reviews
Published: 20 May 2023
A Teaching Note on Strict Liability in Tort
Richard J. Hunter, Jr., John H. Shannon, Henry J. Amoroso
Seton Hall University, University of Tulsa
Download Full-Text Pdf
Keywords: Strict Liability in Tort, Product Defects, Franchising, Used Products, Leasing, Service Transactions, Misuse, Bystanders, Assumption of Risk
Before the Greenman decision in 1963, a plaintiff in a products liability case had to rely on the theories of negligence, breach of warranty, or misrepresentation or fraud for recovery. These theories were not specific to products cases and presented plaintiffs with certain formidable “obstacles.” Because of the many issues raised in applying these theories, courts began to search for a more rational theory for determining liability which would move away from judging the conduct of an actor and instead would focus on the product itself. In Part 6 of the Series on Teaching Notes, the authors focus on the theory of strict liability in tort as the now preferred method of compensating parties for injuries caused by a defective product.
Acosta v. Honda Motor Company (1983). 717 F.2d 828. United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Adams v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. (1960). 251 N.C. 565. Supreme Court of North Carolina,
Adelstein, D. (2023). Verdict forms (general or special) and the two-issue rule. Florida Construction Law Update (Appeal, Standard of Review), https://www.provemyfloridacase.com › verdict-forms-general
Adler, R.S. & Popper, A.F. (2019). The misuse of product misuse: Victim blaming at its worst. William & Mary Business Law Review, 10: 337-367.
Ausness, R.C. (2002). Tort liability for the sale of non-defective products: An analysis and critique of the concept of negligent marketing. South Carolina Law Review, 53(4): 907-966.
Ausness, R.C. (2012). “Fasten your seat belt, Orville”: Exploring the relationship between state-of-the-art, technological and commercial feasibility, and the Restatement’s reasonable alternative design requirement. Indiana Law Review, 45: 669-717.
Barker v. Lull Engineering Co. (1978). 20 Cal. 3d 413. Supreme Court of California.
Bedi, J. (2022). A critical analysis of the doctrine of privity of contract. International Journal of Law Management & Humanities, 5: 1556-1618.
Berg v. Reaction Motion (1962). 181 A.2d 487. Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Betehia v. Cape Cod Corporation. (1960). 103 N.W.2d 64. Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Bieber, C. (2022). Standard of care: Legal definition & Examples. Forbes Advisor (October 10, 2022), https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/medical-malpractice/standard-of-care/
Boatland of Houston v. Bailey (1980). 609 S.W.2d 743. Supreme Court of Texas.
Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products (1973). 493 F.2d 1076. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Bowbeer, H., Lumish, W.F., & Cohen, J.A. (2000). Warning! Failure to read this article may be hazardous to your failure to warn defense. William Mitchell Law Review, 27: 439-466.
Buckler, P.R. (1998). State of the art evidence in products liability in Maryland. University of Baltimore Law Review, 28(1): 117-191.
Burch v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. (1983). 467 A.2d 615, Pennsylvania Superior Court
CMP Law Group (2018). State of the art defense in product liability cases: What it is and how to fight it? CMPlawgroup.com (August 17, 2018), https://cmplawgroup.com/blog/state-of-the-art-defense-in-product-liability-cases-what-is-it-and-how-to-fight-it/
Connolly v. Bull (1968). 65 Cal. Rptr. 689. Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division 1.
Copenhaver, S.M. (2023). When do manufacturers need to anticipate misuses—and abuses—of their products? The National Law Review, XII(85), https://www.natlawreview.com/article/when-do-manufacturers-need-to-anticipate-misuses-and-abuses-their-products
Courter v. Dilbert Bros., Inc. (1959). 186 N.Y.S. 334. New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department.
Daly v. General Motors Corp. (1978). 575 P.2d 1162. Supreme Court of California.
Daubert v. Merrill-Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). 509 U.S. 578. United States Supreme Court.
Department of Commerce (1976). Interagency task force on product liability: Final Report II-4, 5.
Dozier v. Wilcox (2020). 9:20-CV-0144 (BKS/TWD). U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York.
Elmore v. American Motors Corporation (1969). 451 P.2d 84. Supreme Court of California.
Escola v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. (1944). 150 P.2d 436. Supreme Court of California.
Feldman v. Lederle Laboratories (1989). 561 N.J. Super. 599. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Fischer v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986). 103 N.J. 643. Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Fischer, D.A. & Powers, W. (1988). Products liability: Cases and materials. West Publishing Co.: St. Paul, Minn.
FTC v. Tax Club, Inc. (2014). 994 F. Supp. 2d 461. U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.
Gardner v. QHS, Inc. (1969). 304 F. Supp. 1247. U.S. District Court District of South Carolina, Charleston Division.
Geistfeld, M. (2006). Principles of products liability. Foundation Press/West: Minneapolis, Minn.
Giberson v. Ford Motor Company (1974). 504 S.W.2d 8. Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.
Gluck, A.R., Regan, M., & Turret, E., (2020). The Affordable Care Act’s litigation decade. Georgetown Law Journal, 108(6): 1471-1534.
Glaser, M., Jirasek, M., & Windsperger, J. (2020). Ownership structure of franchise chains: trade-off between adaptation and control. International Journal of Economics of Business, 27(3): 357-375.
Gomez, R.S., Gonzales, I.S., & Suarez, L.V. (2010). Service quality control mechanisms in franchise networks. The Service Industries Journal, 31(5): 713-723.
Green, L. (2023). What is privity. Investopedia (January 4, 2023), https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/privity.asp
Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963). 27 Cal. Rptr. 697. Supreme Court of California.
Greeno v. Clark Equipment Company (1965). 237 F. Supp. 427. U.S. District Court, Northern District Indiana, Fort Wayne Division.
Hadley v. Baxendale (1854). 9 Exch. 341. Court of Exchequer, U.K.
Heil v. Grant (1976). 534 S.W.2d 916. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Tyler, Texas.
Henningsen v. Bloomfield (1960). 161 A.2d 69. Supreme Court of New Jersey.
HG.org (2023). What types of damages do products liability cases recover?
Hillman-Kelley v. Pittman (1972). 489 S.W.2d 689. Court of Civil Appeals, El Paso.
Hubbard, F.P. & Sobocinski, E. (2018). Crashworthiness: The collapse of sellers’ responsibilities for product safety with comparative fault. South Carolina Law Review, 69: 741-825.
Hunt v. Ferguson-Paulus Enterprises (1966). 415 P.2d 13. Supreme Court of Oregon.
Hunter, R.J. (2016). A statutory override of an “as is” sale: A historical appraisal and analysis of the UCC, Magnuson-Moss, and state lemon laws. University of Massachusetts Law Review, 11: 44-62.
Hunter, R.J. & Amoroso, H.J. (2011). Damages for pain and suffering and emotional distress in products liability cases involving strict liability and negligence. Faulkner Law Review, 3: 277-302.
Hunter, R.J., Amoroso, H.J., & Shannon, J.H. (2012a). A managerial guide to products liability: A primer on the law in the United States (Part I). International Journal of Learning & Development, 2(3): 34-56.
Hunter, R.J., Amoroso, H.J. & Shannon, J.H. (2012b). A managerial guide to products liability: A primer on the law in the United States: A focus on theories of recovery (Part II). International Journal of Learning and Development, 2(3): 99-122.
Hunter, R.J. & Lozada, H.R. (2013a). A primer on franchising in the United States: A vehicle for economic mobility? (Part I). Global Journal of Management and Business Research (Economics and Commerce), 13(4): 43-52.
Hunter, R.J. & Lozada, H.R. (2013b). The legal aspects of the franchise relationship (Part II). Global Journal of Management and Business Research (Economics and Commerce), 13(4): 1-14.
Hunter, R.J., Lozada, H.R. & Shannon, J.H. (2019). Retailer: Know thy customer! Product warnings and “special circumstances.” International Journal of Business Management and Commerce, 4(3): 4-14.
Hunter, R.J. & Montuori, M.A. (2012). The hand that truly rocks the cradle: A reprise of infant crib safety, lawsuits and regulation from 2007-2012. Loyola Consumer Law Review, 25: 229- 247.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2016). Compensation for bystander injuries in strict products liability: Why it is important to afford bystanders with more protection than consumers or users of products. International Journal of Management Sciences, 7(6): 302-331.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H. & Amoroso, H.J. (2017). Successor liability, company law, and bankruptcy: The context of liability for defective products. International Journal of Business Management and Commerce, 2(5): 14-23.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2018a). Identifying the defendant in products liability litigation: Alternate theories for compensating injured plaintiffs. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 9(8): 10-21.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2018b). How to manage issues relating to the use of trial experts: Standards for the introduction of expert testimony through judicial “gate-keeping” and scientific verification. Journal of Management and Strategy, 9(1): 1-11.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2018c). Products liability: A managerial perspective (2nd ed.) (ISBN: 9781731150684). Seton Hall University: South Orange, N.J.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2019). The case of the Florida lemon: Options for the buyer or trap for the consumer: The Florida Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act. Journal of Economics and Business, 2(4): 1328-1338.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2023a). A teaching note on negligence. Education Quarterly Reviews, 6(1): 436-451.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H. & Amoroso, H.J. (2023a, forthcoming). A teaching note on warranties. Education Quarterly Reviews.
Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., Amoroso, H.J. & Lozada, H.R. (2017). A reprise of compensatory and general damages with a focus on punitive damage awards in products liability cases. International Journal of Business Management ad Commerce, 2(1): 24-37.
Hunter, R.J. & Solano, S. (2015). Making whipped cream or getting high: Product misuse or a failure to warn? Journal of Social Science Research, 8(3): 1672-1682.
Hursh, R.D. & Bailey, H.J. (1974). Hursh & Bailey, 1 American law of products liability 2d. Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Corporation: Rochester, N.Y.
Janes, C.R. (1976). Products Liability—The test of consumer expectation for natural defects in food products. Ohio State Law Journal, 37(3): 634-652.
Jessop, A. (2020). Promotional and operational issues in marketing. Sports Law (4th ed.). Routledge: Milton Park, Oxfordshire, U.K.
Kirby, J. (2012). Minor’s personal injury actions and settlements in North Carolina. Campbell Law Review, 34: 293-421.
Knitz v. Minster Machine Company (1982). 432 N.E.2d 814. Supreme Court of Ohio.
Knowles v. Harnischfeger Corporation (1983). 674 P.2d 200. Washington Court of Appeals.
Kosters v. The Seven-Up Company (1979). 595 F.2d 347. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Kriegler v. Eichler Homes, Inc. (1969). 269 Cal. App. 2d 224. California Court of Appeal.
Lee v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. (1984). 688 P.2d 1283. Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
Lewandowska, A. & Olejnik-Krugly, A. (2022). Do background colors have an impact on preferences and catch the attention of users? Applied Sciences, 12(1): 225-243.
Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975). 532 P.2d 1226. Supreme Court of California.
Lozada, H.R., Hunter, R.J. & Kritz, G.H. (2005). Master franchising as an entry strategy: Marketing and legal implications. The Coastal Business Journal, 4(1): 16-28, https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/cbj/vol4/iss1/3
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916). 111 N.E. 1050. Court of Appeals of New York.
Martin v. Ryder Trucks (1976). 1976). 353 A.2d 581. Supreme Court of Delaware.
Maxted v. Pacific Car Foundry Co. (1974). 527 P.2d 832. Supreme Court of Wyoming.
McClanahan v. California Spray Corp. (1953). 75 S.E.2d 712. Supreme Court of Virginia.
McNichols, W.J. (1994). The relevance of the plaintiff’s misconduct in strict tort products liability, the advent of comparative responsibility, and the proposed Restatement (Third) of Torts. Oklahoma Law Review, 47: 201-290.
Meyer, C. (1998). Distinguishing good science, bad science and junk science. Expert witnessing (1st ed.). Routledge: Milton Park, Oxfordshire, U.K.