Select Page

Torts II
University of Oklahoma College of Law
Meazell, Emily

TORTS II
Strict Liability
·         Strict Liability is the imposition of liability upon an actor despite an absence of any fault/neg.
 
1.      Abnormally Dangerous Activities
a.      (Ryland’s v. Fletcher – Water Tank/ flooded neighbor)
 Rule: Where an actor creates an abnormally dangerous condition or activity he is strictly liable for natural consequences of its escape
·         Exception: Vis major – Acts of God
 
§ Natural v. “nonnatural” uses of land
·         Large tanks of water à liability
·         Water in Pipes à no liability
 
§ (Rylands) Limited to when Something Escapes the Defendants land
 
o   Modern Trend à accept rule in Rylands
§ Modern cities make it more likely escape will cause neighbors harm
§ Party that creates danger should bear burden of cost
o   Factors à circumstances & surroundings
 
b.      Miller v. Civil Constructors (escape)
Rule: § 519 & 520
 
1.       RST § 519 – One who carries on an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to strict liability even if he exercised the utmost care to prevent harm.
2.      RST § 520 – Factors to determine if an activity is abnormally dangerous.
a.      Existence of a high degree of risk of some harm to the person, land, or chattels of others;
b.      Likelihood that the harm that results will be great;
c.       Inability to eliminate the risk by the exercise of reasonable care;
d.      Extent to which the activity is not a matter of common usage;
e.      Inappropriateness of the activity to the place where it is carried on; and
f.        Extent to which its value to the community is outweighed by its dangerous attributes.
 
·         Two or more factors present then activity is “ultrahazardous”
 
§ “The essential Question is whether the risk created is so unusual, either b/c of its magnitude or b/c of the circumstances surrounding it, as to justify the imposition of S/L
§ Courts may also look to Public Policy
 
 
c.       Indian Harbor Belt R.R. v. American Cyanamid
 
Rule:
§ S/L is imposed as a matter of public policy to reduce an activity or encourage them to do something different b/c the activity cannot be done safely.
o   Analysis à Start w/ Factor RST §520 (c) à determine if neg or S/L
 
§ Abnormally dangerous activities
·         Sale of Firearms Not a subject of strict liability
§ Common Usage
·         Transmission of electricity/gas
·         Driving automobile
 
2.      Limitations on S/L
a.      Foster v. Preston (PROXIMATE CAUSE)
 

is reasonable certain to place life and limb in peril when negligently made, it is then a thing of danger.”
1.      “If to the element of danger there is added knowledge that the thing will be used by persons other than the purchaser, and used without new tests, then, irrespective of contract, the manufacturer of this thing of danger is under a duty to make it carefully.” (Use w/o test have to make carefully
2.      Privity of K is no Longer Required à use foreseeability
 
(B) Warranty
a.       Express Warranty
                                                                                   i.      Baxter v. Ford Motor
Rule: If a manufacturer makes an express warranty to retailer and it is communicated to a third party then manufacturer is liable to consumer
1.       SPLITà Reliance on express W?
2.      In order to constitute a Warranty à must be specific
 
·         If a person states as a material facts to one who relies upon it to his injury & they ended up being false liable