Podcasts about Product liability

mastering engaging elements unveiled assumption strict high risk defenses inability torts bar exam product liability strict liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 14, 2023 7:28

Understanding Strict Liability. Strict liability is a legal concept that holds a party responsible for certain actions or injuries, regardless of their intent or level of care. Unlike negligence or intentional torts, strict liability focuses on the inherent risk associated with certain activities or products. Cases Where Strict Liability Applies. Strict liability is often applied in the following scenarios: Ultra-Hazardous Activities: Activities that are inherently dangerous and pose a high risk of harm may give rise to strict liability. These activities are considered so risky that those who engage in them are held strictly liable for resulting harms. Example: Blasting operations in densely populated areas are considered ultra-hazardous activities. Product Liability: Strict liability is frequently applied in cases involving defective products. If a product is found to be defective and causes harm, the manufacturer or seller may be held strictly liable for the injuries. Example: If a consumer is injured due to a manufacturing defect in a household appliance, strict liability may apply to the manufacturer. Elements of Strict Liability. To establish strict liability, certain elements must be present: Engaging in an Ultra-Hazardous Activity or Product Defect: The defendant must either engage in an ultra-hazardous activity or be involved in the production or distribution of a defective product. Causation: The plaintiff must establish that the harm suffered was a result of the ultra-hazardous activity or the defect in the product. Harm: As with other tort claims, the plaintiff must have suffered harm or damages as a result of the defendant's actions. Ultra-Hazardous Activities. Ultra-hazardous activities are those that involve a high degree of risk of harm, even when conducted with utmost care. Some factors that may determine whether an activity is ultra-hazardous include: High Risk of Harm: The activity must pose a high risk of harm, even when conducted with reasonable care. Inability to Eliminate Risk: The risk associated with the activity must be such that it cannot be completely eliminated, regardless of the precautions taken. Not a Common Activity: The activity should not be a common one in the community. Product Liability and Defective Products. In the realm of product liability, strict liability can be imposed for injuries caused by defective products. There are three main types of product defects that may lead to strict liability: Design Defects: These occur when the design of the product is inherently dangerous, making it defective even before it is manufactured. Manufacturing Defects: These defects arise during the manufacturing process, causing certain units of a product to be different from the intended design. Marketing Defects (Failure to Warn): A product may be defective if it lacks proper warnings or instructions regarding its use, resulting in harm to the consumer. Defenses to Strict Liability. While strict liability imposes liability without proving fault, there are some defenses available to defendants: Assumption of Risk: If the plaintiff voluntarily assumes the risk associated with the ultra-hazardous activity or the use of the product, it can serve as a defense. Example: If a person knowingly participates in a hazardous recreational activity, they might be considered to have assumed the risks associated with it. Contributory or Comparative Negligence: In some jurisdictions, the plaintiff's own negligence in causing the harm may reduce or eliminate the defendant's liability. Example: If a person's negligence contributes to their injury while engaged in a risky activity, the defense of contributory or comparative negligence may be raised. Product Misuse: If the plaintiff's misuse of the product is a substantial factor in causing the harm, it may be a defense. Example: If a consumer uses a product in a way that is not intended or recommended and gets injured, the defense of product misuse may apply. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Contracts Law Chapter 16: Warranties and Product Liability

ai law putting principles speech principle application ea trains bad things pilots liability aesop david friedman rationalist product liability lesswrong

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 12, 2023 5:00

Express Warranties. Introduction to Express Warranties. Express warranties are explicit promises or representations made by a seller regarding the quality, characteristics, or performance of a product. Law students should comprehend the essentials of express warranties: Nature of Statements: Express warranties can be made through statements, affirmations, or descriptions of fact about the goods. Basis of the Bargain: The representation must become part of the basis of the bargain, meaning the buyer relies on it when making the purchase. Implied Warranties. Implied warranties are inherent in every sale of goods, regardless of whether they are explicitly stated. Law students should understand the two primary types of implied warranties: Implied Warranty of Merchantability: This warranty assures that the product is fit for its ordinary purpose and meets industry standards. Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose: This warranty applies when the seller knows the buyer's specific purpose for the goods and recommends a product to meet that purpose. Disclaiming and Limiting Warranties. Sellers have the ability to disclaim or limit warranties, but certain rules apply: Clear Language: Disclaimers must be clear and conspicuous, and limitations must be reasonable. Implied Warranties: Disclaimers for implied warranties, especially the implied warranty of merchantability, are subject to strict scrutiny. Product Liability. Introduction to Product Liability. Product liability law holds manufacturers and sellers responsible for defects in their products that cause harm. Key points include: Three Main Theories: Product liability cases typically revolve around strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Consumer Protection: Product liability law serves as a crucial element in consumer protection, ensuring accountability for the safety of products. Strict Liability in Product Liability. The Concept of Strict Liability. Strict liability holds manufacturers and sellers responsible for injuries caused by defective products, irrespective of negligence. Law students should grasp the elements of strict liability: Defective Product: The product must be defective, either due to its design, manufacturing, or inadequate warnings. Causation: The defect must have caused the injury. Types of Product Defects. Understanding the types of defects is essential: Design Defects: Inherent flaws in a product's design that make it unsafe. Manufacturing Defects: Defects that occur during the production process, making individual products dangerous. Marketing Defects (Failure to Warn): Inadequate warnings or instructions related to product use. Negligence in Product Liability. The Role of Negligence. Negligence is another theory in product liability cases, involving failure to exercise reasonable care in the design, production, or marketing of a product: Duty of Care: The manufacturer or seller owes a duty of care to consumers. Breach of Duty: The breach involves actions or omissions that fall below the standard of care. Causation: The breach must be the direct cause of the consumer's injury. Defenses to Negligence Claims. Defendants may assert various defenses: Assumption of Risk: The consumer was aware of and accepted the risks. Comparative Negligence: The consumer's negligence contributed to the injury. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

LW - Principles For Product Liability (With Application To AI) by johnswentworth

The Nonlinear Library

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 10, 2023 16:42

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Principles For Product Liability (With Application To AI), published by johnswentworth on December 10, 2023 on LessWrong. There were several responses to What I Would Do If I Were Working On AI Governance which focused on the liability section, and had similar criticisms. In particular, I'll focus on this snippet as a good representative: Making cars (or ladders or knives or printing presses or...) "robust to misuse", as you put it, is not the manufacturer's job. The commenter calls manufacturer liability for misuse "an absurd overreach which ignores people's agency in using the products they purchase". Years ago I would have agreed with that; it's an intuitive and natural view, especially for those of us with libertarian tendencies. But today I disagree, and claim that that's basically not the right way to think about product liability, in general. With that motivation in mind: this post lays out some general principles for thinking about product liability, followed by their application to AI. Principle 1: "User Errors" Are Often Design Problems There's this story about an airplane (I think the B-52 originally?) where the levers for the flaps and landing gear were identical and right next to each other. Pilots kept coming in to land, and accidentally retracting the landing gear. Then everyone would be pissed at the pilot for wrecking the bottom of the plane, as it dragged along the runway at speed. The usual Aesop of the story is that this was a design problem with the plane more than a mistake on the pilots' part; the problem was fixed by putting a little rubber wheel on the landing gear lever. If we put two identical levers right next to each other, it's basically inevitable that mistakes will be made; that's bad interface design. More generally: whenever a product will be used by lots of people under lots of conditions, there is an approximately-100% chance that the product will frequently be used by people who are not paying attention, not at their best, and (in many cases) just not very smart to begin with. The only way to prevent foolish mistakes sometimes causing problems, is to design the product to be robust to those mistakes - e.g. adding a little rubber wheel to the lever which retracts the landing gear, so it's robust to pilots who aren't paying attention to that specific thing while landing a plane. Putting the responsibility on users to avoid errors will always, predictably, result in errors. The same also applies to intentional misuse: if a product is widely available, there is an approximately-100% chance that it will be intentionally misused sometimes. Putting the responsibility on users will always, predictably, result in users sometimes doing Bad Things with the product. However, that does not mean that it's always worthwhile to prevent problems. Which brings us to the next principle. Principle 2: Liability Is Not A Ban A toy example: a railroad runs past a farmer's field. Our toy example is in ye olden days of steam trains, so the train tends to belch out smoke and sparks on the way by. That creates a big problem for everyone in the area if and when the farmer's crops catch fire. Nobody wants a giant fire. (I think I got this example from David Friedman's book Law's Order, which I definitely recommend.) Now, one way a legal system could handle the situation would be to ban the trains. One big problem with that approach is: maybe it's actually worth the trade-off to have crop fires sometimes. Trains sure do generate a crapton of economic value. If the rate of fires isn't too high, it may just be worth it to eat the cost, and a ban would prevent that. Liability sidesteps that failure-mode. If the railroad is held liable for the fires, it may still choose to eat that cost. Probably the railroad will end up passing (at least some of) that cost throug...

Getting Ahead Of The Upcoming EU Product Liability Directive (Feat. Clive Greenwood & Prof. Simon Choi)

China Manufacturing Decoded

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 24, 2023 41:17

In this episode... Renaud hosts this episode on the EU's forthcoming directive on product liability which should get you nervous if you sell into Europe. Clive Greenwood and Prof. Simon Choi are two highly experienced compliance experts and Professor Choi brings a fresh outlook on how this affects manufacturers in China and EU importers in legal terms. Show Sections 00:00 - Greetings and introducing today's topic. 04:23 - What is the intent of the directive? 06:53 - What does this directive change for economic operators on the distribution and retail side of things? 12:47 - Transparency in the supply chain. 16:56 - Even if a factory in, say, China can now be held liable for product problems as a supply chain actor under this new legislation, realistically, can an importer obtain compensation from them? 24:47 - How the burden of proof for manufacturers is changing. 28:45 - Product labelling must make it easier for any parties, especially consumers, to bring a case against a product's seller. 32:50 - Foreign manufacturers are going to be under a lot of pressure to change the way they do things. 34:02 - Why the product safety's burden of proof is on the party who brings the product into the EU. 37:17 - Will this directive even be possible to enforce in manufacturing in China? 39:38 - Wrapping up. Related content... How ISO 37301 Might Improve Chinese Suppliers' Compliance Exploring 9 Quality Management Challenges in China [Podcast] The EU Ecodesign Regulation Is Coming, But Are You Prepared? [Podcast part1] Exploring Product Safety & Reliability Issue Liability [Podcast] Get in touch with us Connect with us on LinkedIn Send us a tweet @sofeast Prefer Facebook? Check us out on FB Contact us via Sofeast's contact page Subscribe to our YouTube channel Subscribe to the podcast There are more episodes to come, so remember to subscribe! You can do so in your favorite podcast apps here and don't forget to give us a 5-star rating, please: Apple Podcasts Spotify Google Podcasts TuneIn Amazon Podcasts Deezer iHeartRADIO PlayerFM Listen Notes Podcast Addict Podchaser

europe china european union prof product transparency wrapping foreign greenwood clive choi renaud directive getting ahead product liability

Mastering the Bar Exam: Torts Episode 13: Strict Liability in Tort Law

mastering engaging elements assumption strict high risk defenses inability torts bar exam product liability tort law strict liability

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 16, 2023 6:00

Defining Strict Liability. Strict liability is a legal doctrine that holds a party liable for certain actions or injuries regardless of their intent or level of care. Unlike negligence or intentional torts, strict liability focuses on the inherent risk associated with certain activities or products. Cases Where Strict Liability Applies. Strict liability commonly applies in the following situations: Ultra-Hazardous Activities: Activities that are inherently dangerous and pose a high risk of harm may give rise to strict liability. Examples include blasting, transporting hazardous materials, and keeping wild animals. Product Liability: Strict liability is often applied in cases involving defective products. If a product is defective and causes harm, the manufacturer or seller may be held strictly liable for the injuries. Elements of Strict Liability. To establish strict liability, certain elements must be present: Engaging in an Ultra-Hazardous Activity or Product Defect: The defendant must either engage in an ultra-hazardous activity or be involved in the production or distribution of a defective product. Causation: The plaintiff must establish that the harm suffered was a result of the ultra-hazardous activity or the defect in the product. Harm: Like other tort claims, the plaintiff must have suffered harm or damages as a result of the defendant's actions. Ultra-Hazardous Activities. Ultra-hazardous activities are those that involve a high degree of risk of harm, even when conducted with utmost care. Some factors that may determine whether an activity is ultra-hazardous include: High Risk of Harm: The activity must pose a high risk of harm, even when conducted with reasonable care. Inability to Eliminate Risk: The risk associated with the activity must be such that it cannot be completely eliminated, regardless of the precautions taken. Not a Common Activity: The activity should not be a common one in the community. Product Liability and Defective Products. In the realm of product liability, strict liability can be imposed for injuries caused by defective products. There are three main types of product defects that may lead to strict liability: Design Defects: These occur when the design of the product is inherently dangerous, making it defective even before it is manufactured. Manufacturing Defects: These defects arise during the manufacturing process, causing certain units of a product to be different from the intended design. Marketing Defects (Failure to Warn): A product may be defective if it lacks proper warnings or instructions regarding its use, resulting in harm to the consumer. Defenses to Strict Liability. While strict liability imposes liability without proving fault, there are some defenses available to defendants: Assumption of Risk: If the plaintiff voluntarily assumes the risk associated with the ultra-hazardous activity or the use of the product, it can serve as a defense. Contributory or Comparative Negligence: In some jurisdictions, the plaintiff's own negligence in causing the harm may reduce or eliminate the defendant's liability. Product Misuse: If the plaintiff's misuse of the product is a substantial factor in causing the harm, it may be a defense. Case Example: Ultrahazardous Activity - Blasting Operation Imagine a scenario where a company engages in a blasting operation to clear a construction site. Despite taking all reasonable precautions, the blasting operation causes vibrations that result in damage to neighboring properties. In this case: Ultra-Hazardous Activity: Blasting is considered an ultra-hazardous activity due to its high risk of harm, even with reasonable care. Causation: The harm suffered by the neighboring properties is a direct result of the blasting operation. Case Example: Product Liability - Defective Automobile Airbags. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Contracts Law: Chapter 11: Warranties and Product Liability

law fitness product types concept express elements contracts basis statements strict negligence implied warranties product liability strict liability

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 7, 2023 5:07

Introduction to Express Warranties. Express warranties are promises, affirmations, or descriptions of fact made by the seller to the buyer as part of the basis of the bargain. These warranties can be explicit statements about the product's quality, performance, or characteristics. It's essential for law students to understand the key elements of express warranties: Statements and Promises: Express warranties can be created through statements, affirmations, or promises made by the seller. Basis of the Bargain: The representation must be part of the basis of the bargain. In other words, the buyer must rely on the statement when making the purchase. Implied Warranties. Implied warranties are inherent in every sale of goods, whether or not they are expressly stated. They are not explicitly promised by the seller but are implied by law. Law students should grasp the two primary forms of implied warranties: Implied Warranty of Merchantability: This warranty guarantees that the product is fit for the ordinary purposes for which it is used. In essence, it must meet the standards for what is considered acceptable in the trade. Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose: This warranty applies when the buyer relies on the seller's expertise to select a product suitable for a specific use. If the seller knows the buyer's purpose and recommends a product, it implicitly warrants the product's fitness for that purpose. Disclaiming and Limiting Warranties. Warranties, both express and implied, can be disclaimed or limited. It is vital to understand the legal mechanisms for doing so: Disclaimers: A seller may disclaim warranties in clear and unambiguous language. However, there are legal limits on disclaimers for implied warranties, especially the implied warranty of merchantability. Limitations: Sellers can also limit their liability for breach of warranty in certain cases, such as limiting the buyer's remedies. These limitations must be fair and reasonable. Product Liability. Introduction to Product Liability. Product liability is a field of law that deals with the responsibility of manufacturers and sellers for injuries caused by their products. It encompasses issues related to product defects, warnings, and the safety of products. Key points include: Three Main Theories: Product liability cases generally revolve around three main theories: strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Consumer Protection: Product liability law serves as a critical aspect of consumer protection. It holds manufacturers and sellers accountable for producing and distributing safe products. Strict Liability in Product Liability. The Concept of Strict Liability. Strict liability is a legal doctrine that holds manufacturers and sellers responsible for injuries caused by defective products, regardless of whether they were negligent. This doctrine significantly affects product liability cases: Elements of Strict Liability: To establish strict liability, the plaintiff must typically demonstrate that the product was unreasonably dangerous and that the defect caused their injury. No Need to Prove Negligence: Unlike negligence claims, plaintiffs pursuing a strict liability claim do not need to prove that the manufacturer or seller was negligent. Types of Product Defects. There are three primary types of product defects under the theory of strict liability, and students should have a comprehensive understanding of each: Design Defects: These are inherent flaws in a product's design that render it unsafe for its intended use. Manufacturing Defects: Manufacturing defects occur during the production process and make individual products dangerous. Marketing Defects (Failure to Warn): These defects pertain to inadequate warnings or instructions related to product use. Negligence in Product Liability. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Substantial Product Hazard: Preparing for Product Liability

Arent Fox Legal Podcasts

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 11, 2023 8:54

In the latest episode of Fashion Counsel, AFS Chairman Anthony V. Lupo is joined by Thomas Crispi, AFS Product Liability and Mass Torts Practice leader, to discuss how retailers and manufacturers can anticipate potential product issues and have a plan in place to handle US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) inquires, class actions, and probable liability.

preparing hazard substantial product liability

EP 441- Corporate Rep Depositions for Product Liability

corporate depositions product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 30, 2023 30:19

The corporate rep depo is a powerful tool to expand discovery and solidify facts in your case. Today's discussion covers what information you should seek in a corporate rep depo, effective ways to organize comprehensive topics and questions, and how to address common objections.

EP 441- Corporate Rep Depositions for Product Liability

corporate depositions product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 30, 2023 30:19

EP440- Building a Strong Foundation for Product Liability Part Two

design strong foundation product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 23, 2023 29:22

Your product liability case isn't just about a single product. Design changes, comparable models, previous incidents and marketing materials should be carefully examined to find the potential flaw or “profit over people” claim for liability. We'll offer more tips on where to look to find this information and how to use it.

EP440- Building a Strong Foundation for Product Liability Part Two

design strong foundation product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 23, 2023 29:22

Ep 111: Passionate Advocacy: Demystifying Personal Injury Law

The Confident Retirement

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 17, 2023 27:22

Are you familiar with the factors involved in an injury case? Liability and damages play a crucial role. But have you ever wondered how the courts handle these cases? Join host Kris Flammang and guest Mitchell Panter as they discuss the ins and outs of injury cases on the latest episode of The Confident Retirement podcast. Discover the importance of liability and fault, the role of insurance coverage, and the challenges of navigating the judicial system. Whether you've been involved in an accident or simply want to learn more about the legal process, this episode is a must-listen. Tune in now and gain valuable insights from these legal experts! Mitchell J. Panter is the Managing Partner of Panter, Panter & Sampedro, a personal injury law firm in Miami consisting of 5 attorneys and 11 full time staff members. The firm not only advocates for injured individuals but also for keeping the community at large safer through law changes and holding negligent parties accountable for correcting hazards. In addition, both Mitchell and the firm have been a pilar in the community for more than 30 years. As past president of several legal and community organizations, Mitchell continues to actively participate in various causes throughout South Florida. He has lectured and taught for associations including Bar Associations, high schools and business groups. Mitchell primarily practices in the areas of Personal Injury, Wrongful Death, Product Liability, Medical Malpractice and Premises Liability cases. Early in his career, he argued the case of American Aerial Lift v. Jose Perez in the Florida Supreme Court addressing the issue of Strict Liability and Product Liability. This precedent setting case involved the award of a $1.7 million dollar verdict obtained by the firm in the trial court for Mr. Perez as a result of injuries he sustained due to a defective scissor lift. Mitchell has secured several million-dollar settlements and verdicts for his clients and continues to represent individuals injured due to the negligence of others. Together, Kris and Mitchell discuss discuss the misconceptions about personal injury law, emphasize the role of communication between lawyers and clients, and explain the steps involved in an injury case. Panter emphasizes the need for effective communication, managing client expectations, and providing realistic outcomes and compensation amounts. They also discuss challenges in personal injury law, such as educating clients on structured settlements and navigating changes in the political and regulatory landscape. Ultimately, the podcast highlights the importance of finding passion in your career, specializing in areas you enjoy, and advocating for clients in the legal field. Here is what to expect on this week's show: Mitchell's legal career Specializing in personal injury law The importance of liability and fault Managing client expectations Community advocacy Navigating the judicial system The role of insurance coverage Connect with Mitchell: https://panterlaw.com/staff-member/mitchell-j-panter/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

EP 439- Building a Strong Foundation for Product Liability Part One

strong foundation product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 16, 2023 32:50

The scope of your pleadings dictates the scope of your discovery, and it's important to make sure your pleadings are broad enough to allow discovery into all the product issues you need to explore. This two-part discussion outlines a discovery checklist for product liability cases, including what documents and persons may be pertinent to your case and how to track them down.

EP 439- Building a Strong Foundation for Product Liability Part One

strong foundation product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 16, 2023 32:50

EP 438- Anatomy of a Product Liability Case Part Two

anatomy product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 9, 2023 30:49

Our discussion on building a product liability case continues, with a focus on pre-suit discovery, regulations, industry standards and potential defendants that are often overlooked.

EP 438- Anatomy of a Product Liability Case Part Two

anatomy product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 9, 2023 30:49

Our discussion on building a product liability case continues, with a focus on pre-suit discovery, regulations, industry standards and potential defendants that are often overlooked.

EP 437 - Anatomy of a Product Liability Case Part 1

product anatomy erich product liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 2, 2023 32:04

Are you missing a product liability claim ? Product liability cases can be complex, challenging, and sometimes hard to recognize. John, Tim and Erich discuss how to recognize and evaluate a product liability claim as well as how to overcome some of its most common challenges.

EP 437 - Anatomy of a Product Liability Case Part 1