Strict Liability -
[1]
Elements and Case Citations
(1) Manufacturer or seller places a defective product on the market;
(2) The defective product is sold in an unreasonably dangerous condition;
(3) The product reaches the plaintiff without
substantial change in the condition in which the product is sold; and
(4) The defect is the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
____________________________________
Florida State Courts
Supreme Court: West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80, 86 (Fla. 1976)
First District: Jones v. Heil Co., 566 So. 2d 565, 567 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
Second District: Savage v. Jacobsen Mfg., 396 So. 2d 731, 732 (Fla. 2d DCA
1981)
Third District: Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc. v. Medina, 719 So. 2d 312,
315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
Fourth District: Armoroso v. Samuel Friedland Family Enters., 604 So. 2d 827,
834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), aff’d 630 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 1994)
Fifth District: Cintron v. Osmose Wood Preserving, Inc., 681 So.2d 859, 861
(Fla.5th DCA 1996)
Florida Federal Courts
Eleventh Circuit: Jennings v. BIC Corp., 181 F.3d 1250, 1255 (11th
Cir. 1999)
Southern District: Beale v. Biomet, Inc., 492 F. Supp. 2d 1360, 1365 n.8 (S.D. Fla. 2007)
Middle District: Benitez v. Synthes, Inc., 199 F.Supp.2d 1339, 1343 (M.D.
Fla. 2002)
Northern District: Chatham Steel Corp. v. Brown, 858 F.Supp. 1130 (N.D. Fla. 1994)
Florida Statutes
§ 768.73, Fla. Stat. (limitation on punitive damages for strict liability)
References
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402(A) (1965)
[2] Defenses to Claim
for Strict Liability
(1) Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110(d) (pleading affirmative defenses), and other standard defenses. See § 60.
(2) Statute of Limitations: § 95.11(3)(e), Fla. Stat. (four years).
(3) The statute of repose bars product liability actions based on harm ``allegedly caused by a product with an expected useful life of 10 years or less, if the harm was caused by exposure to or use of the product more than 12 years after delivery of the product to its first purchaser or lessee who was not engaged in the business of selling or leasing the product or of using the product as a component in the manufacture of another product,’’ unless the product is specifically exempted as having a useful life greater than 10 years. § 95.031(2)(b), Fla. Stat.
(4) Product misuse will diminish the plaintiff’s recovery through comparative negligence. Standard Havens Products, Inc. v. Benitez, 648 So. 2d 1192, 1197 (Fla. 1994).
(5) Assumption of the risk will diminish the plaintiff’s recovery through comparative negligence. Blackburn v. Dorta, 348 So. 2d 287, 298 (Fla. 1977).
(6) Manufacturers are not liable for damages caused by products that cannot be made safe for its ordinary and intended uses when the product is still useful despite the product’s known risks. See Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 402A Comment K (1986); see also Zanzuri v. G.D. Searle & Co., 748 F. Supp. 1511, 1518 (S.D. Fla. 1990) (listing federal requirements of Comment K defense); Adams v. G. D. Searle & Co., Inc., 576 So. 2d 728, 733-734 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991 ) (listing Florida requirement for Comment K defense).
(7) The economic loss rule bars tort claims in product liability actions where a contract exists and only the product is damaged. See Comptech International, Inc. v. Milam Commerce Park, Ltd., 753 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 1999) (explaining Florida’s economic loss rule).
(8) Consent is a defense to strict liability claims. See Restatement (Second) of Torts § 892 (1965).
