LAW 5151 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: False Light, Conclusive Presumption, Bed Bug
Document Summary
Everyday experience (car suddenly explodes, brake failure right after you left the dealership)- really cuts back on ce (limits it to res ipsa-like situations). Jury"s will look at cost-benefit piece by piece instead of looking at the product as a whole. Soc: to inform how to use safely (reasonable care- reasonably adequate warning under the circumstance). If you impose hindsight as liability, you inhibit innovation. P has to establish that d had prior actual knowledge: proximate cause and comparative fault in products liability: Union pump (663): proximate cause connection too attenuated- although court does not explain why exactly. harm within the risk in this case: oil refinery- chemical plant- explosion, fire. Webb (667): comparative fault: wire and bundle not fixed properly- manufacturing defect. Harm within the risk (ex ante): bundle unhooks and sign crashes into other cars- might necessitate repair on the road side--- expose users to danger. P satisfied burden of proof for design and prima facie for warning.
