Skip to main content

Product Liability and Innovation Managing Risk in an Uncertain Environment (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Making Product Liability Work for You: A Path Out of the Product Liability Jungle
Pages 30-36

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 30...
... In this area, strict liability, which means that liability is imposed even though the manufacturer was not in any way at fault and which began in the United States in 1963,1 is really strict. There are some defenses, but they are predicated on rather unusual examples of user conduct, for example, total misuse of a product, such as driving a car across a river.
Read the entire page →
From page 31...
... A classic case happened in 1930 when an automobile company said that its glass would not shatter.3 The glass was hit extraordinarily hard by a rock at high speed, and the glass shattered and hit the driver. The company was liable for the injury.
Read the entire page →
From page 32...
... Another cause of action under which liability has occasionally been imposed has been the "continuing duty to warn."~° This means if after a product is made the manufacturer discovers a new and significant risk, the courts say there is a duty upon the manufacturer to take reasonable steps to warn the owners. The warranty card that comes with most consumer products allows manufacturers to keep track of who owns that product.
Read the entire page →
From page 33...
... TORT REFORM INITIATIVES State Tort Reform State tort reform efforts are under way to make both warnings law and design law more explicit so that the rules become more understandable and fairer. The work is being conducted by the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA)
Read the entire page →
From page 34...
... At this point, it seems likely that reforms dealing with design and the duty to warn will arise out of state tort reform. Overall reform of joint liability and punitive damages will occur at the state level, but to be totally effective it must occur at the federal level.
Read the entire page →
From page 35...
... Second, most countries that have adopted the EC Directive limit liability to known technical knowledge that was in existence at the time the product was put in circulation. In the United States, that "state-of-the-art" limitation is the law in every state except Massachusetts and Hawaii.
Read the entire page →
From page 36...
... Some respected observers have called this trend a "quiet revolution." Although the revolution is not complete, the changes have made the job of those seeking to manage product liability more feasible. As comparues and engineers work toward el~m~nahng the potential for product liability lawsuits, the law itself may continue to embody more rational thought and reasoriing.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • tort reform
  • liability law
  • punitive damages
  • express warranty
  • alternative design

  • state tort
  • joint liability
  • reasonable steps
  • innocent misrepresentation
  • reform efforts

  • manufacturing defects
  • held liable
  • design defects
  • judicial court
  • state level

  • feasible alternative
  • punitive damage
  • victor schwartz
  • manage product
  • senate bill

  • machine tools
  • warranty concerns
  • american tort
  • liability bill
  • directive limit

  • past five
  • supreme judicial
  • shield litigation
  • person discovered
  • preserve claims


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.