Torts Flashcards

Which factor is most critical in determining whether an activity is 'abnormally dangerous' for strict liability purposes under the Restatement approach?

Answer: Whether the risk of the activity cannot be eliminated even with the exercise of reasonable care

A central factor under both the Restatement Second and Third is whether the risk of the activity cannot be eliminated even with reasonable care, distinguishing it from activities where precautions suffice.

A manufacturing defect in products liability is best described as:

Answer: A deviation of a specific product unit from its intended design, making it more dangerous than intended

A manufacturing defect exists when a particular product unit deviates from the manufacturer's intended design, making that specific unit more dangerous than the product was designed to be.

Under the consumer expectations test for design defect in products liability, a product is defective if:

Answer: The product fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used as intended

The consumer expectations test holds a product defectively designed if it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used in a reasonably foreseeable manner.

In a failure-to-warn products liability claim, the adequacy of a product warning is judged by whether:

Answer: The warning reasonably communicated the nature and extent of the risk to the ordinary user

An adequate warning must reasonably communicate the nature and extent of the product's risks to the ordinary user so they can make an informed decision about use.

Arizona follows a pure comparative negligence system. Under this system, a plaintiff found 60% at fault for their own injuries may recover:

Answer: 40% of their total damages from the defendant

Under pure comparative negligence, the plaintiff's recovery is reduced in proportion to their own fault — a plaintiff 60% at fault recovers 40% of total damages, with no bar to recovery regardless of fault percentage.

Which of the following is NOT a recoverable element of compensatory damages in a tort action?

Answer: Punitive damages

Punitive damages are not compensatory — they are awarded to punish the defendant for egregious conduct and deter future wrongdoing, not to compensate the plaintiff for actual losses suffered.

The 'eggshell plaintiff' (thin skull) rule provides that:

Answer: A defendant takes the plaintiff as found and is liable for the full extent of harm even if the plaintiff was unusually susceptible to injury

The eggshell plaintiff rule holds defendants liable for the full extent of the plaintiff's injuries even if the plaintiff was unusually susceptible due to a pre-existing condition, as long as the type of harm was foreseeable.