Attorneys

Some persons or companies may be held “strictly liable” for certain activities that harm others, even if they have not acted negligently or with wrongful intent. Under this theory, a person injured by a defective or unexpectedly dangerous product, for instance, may recover compensation from the maker or seller of the product without showing that the manufacturer or seller was actually negligent. Also, persons or companies engaged in using explosives, storing dangerous substances, or keeping dangerous animals can be strictly liable for harm caused to others as a result of such activities. The theory behind imposing strict liability on those conducting such activities is that these activities pose an undue risk of harm to members of the community. Thus, anyone who conducts such activity does so at his own risk and is liable when something goes wrong and someone is harmed. The people who create certain risks are thus made accountable. In strict product liability, it is unnecessary to prove that the manufacturer was negligent; all you have to do is show that the product was defective, that it was allowed to be sold, and that the injuries were caused by the defect in the product. Some instances in which the law might apply strict liability are with regard to product liability, abnormally dangerous or ultra-hazardous activities and animal owner’s liability. For example, a plaintiff may be entitled to compensation after a defective product injures him or her regardless of whether the manufacturer was actually negligent. In other words, the plaintiff only has to prove that a product is defective or unreasonably dangerous and that the defect caused the injury. It is not necessary to show that the manufacturer was careless or negligent, which is much more difficult to prove.

Personal Injury Sub-categories

Asbestos Assault and Battery Benzene Exposure Car Accident Defamation of Character Dog Bite Legal Terms

Medical Negligence Mold Product Liability Slip and Fall SUV Rollovers Taser Guns Toxic Torts