Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Torts

University of Kentucky

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Strict products liability

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Role Of Litigation In The Fight Against Prescription Drug Abuse, Richard C. Ausness Apr 2014

The Role Of Litigation In The Fight Against Prescription Drug Abuse, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Prescription drug abuse problems have prompted a number of responses by both drug users (and abusers) and by various federal and state government agencies.

Part I of this Article examines the impressive array of liability theories that individual litigants have relied upon in their lawsuits against Purdue. These theories include: negligence; strict products liability, including design defect and inadequate warning claims; breach of the implied warranty of merchantability; violation of state consumer protection statutes; negligent marketing; fraudulent misrepresentation; civil conspiracy; and "malicious conduct." Purdue, the company that developed OxyContin, has pursued an aggressive "no settlement" policy and has chosen to …


An Insurance-Based Compensation System For Product-Related Injuries, Richard C. Ausness Jan 1997

An Insurance-Based Compensation System For Product-Related Injuries, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In recent years, an increasing number of commentators have begun to express doubts about the effectiveness of the tort system. According to these critics, tort law does not deter accidents, nor does it spread accident costs efficiently. Worst of all, the tort system is extremely expensive to operate. Some of this criticism has spilled over into the products liability area. Products liability law has been condemned as expensive, ineffective, and regressive; in addition, it has been blamed for higher product prices, foreign competition, problems within the liability insurance industry, corporate bankruptcies, lack of product development, and the removal of useful …


Learned Intermediaries And Sophisticated Users: Encouraging The Use Of Intermediaries To Transmit Product Safety Information, Richard C. Ausness Jan 1996

Learned Intermediaries And Sophisticated Users: Encouraging The Use Of Intermediaries To Transmit Product Safety Information, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The general rule, under both negligence principles and strict products liability, is that a producer or supplier is required to warn users or consumers of its products. In most cases, this duty can be satisfied by placing a warning label on the product itself or by providing safety information in an owner's manual or in other literature attached to or enclosed with the product. However, there are some situations where it is difficult or impracticable to provide a direct warning to the ultimate user or consumer. In such cases, producers and suppliers should be able to satisfy their duty to …


Individual And Institutional Responsibility: A Vision For Comparative Fault In Products Liability, Mary J. Davis Jan 1994

Individual And Institutional Responsibility: A Vision For Comparative Fault In Products Liability, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Since the adoption of strict products liability over the last thirty years, two problems of scope have received the most attention: how to define product defectiveness to which the liability attaches, and how to limit the potentially limitless liability through defenses. Much like the industries of the nineteenth century, product liability defendants of the twentieth century turned to the plaintiff's conduct as a main line of defense. Blaming the victim has historically been a powerful tool for tort defendants to evade responsibility for their conduct. This Article proposes that the defenses based on victim fault that have evolved in our …


Surrogate Immunity: The Government Contract Defense And Products Liability, Richard C. Ausness Jan 1986

Surrogate Immunity: The Government Contract Defense And Products Liability, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The government contract defense is an affirmative defense that shields a manufacturer from liability if the product causing injury complied strictly with design specifications set forth in a government procurement contract. The defense was first used by public works contractors to bar claims against them for damage to land and other property. However, in recent years, product manufacturers have invoked the government contract defense to avoid liability to third parties for defectively designed products supplied to the government.

Despite widespread judicial acceptance of the government contract defense in products liability litigation, a number of issues are still being hotly debated. …