Torts: product liability

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
connordalto

Bronze
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 4:22 pm

Torts: product liability

Postby connordalto » Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:54 pm

Hi all, quick question about product liability.

I'm confused about when to argue the 2nd Restatement versus the 3rd Restatement in a prima facie products liability case. Should we be arguing both in the alternative for the plaintiff, or should we argue the 2nd for the plaintiff and use the 3rd to rebut the plaintiffs prima facie case as the defense?

Also, should you be arguing manufacturing, design defects or failure to warn explicitly under the 2nd Restatement?

Let me know if you need any clarity on these questions. Thanks!

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Torts: product liability

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:14 am

This is 100% professor/jurisdiction-dependent. But there are three possibilities:

1. Your professor will tell you how they expect you to reconcile the R2 and R3 approaches.
2. Your professor will tell you which approach should be applied to each relevant question on the exam.
3. Your professor will expect you to know some of the different state approaches and use those states as settings for different fact patterns.

User avatar
Dodocogon

Silver
Posts: 630
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 11:45 pm

Re: Torts: product liability

Postby Dodocogon » Sun Dec 10, 2017 6:56 pm

I agree this is question dependent. Assuming the question is stateless (applying other jurisdiction's doctrine) the rationale in our class is that manufacturers must comply with all jurisdictions as they could brought to suit any, so we're usually arguing both in the alternative for the plaintiff. I also think you'll be fine arguing manufacturing/design/warning under the second as those concerns go into the analysis of if it was unreasonably dangerous anyway.

User avatar
pancakes3

Platinum
Posts: 6619
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Torts: product liability

Postby pancakes3 » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:42 am

i still can't decide whether profs do a bad job of explaining what restatements are, or if 1Ls are too dumb to understand.

deliciouss

New
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Torts: product liability

Postby deliciouss » Mon Dec 11, 2017 7:05 pm

pancakes3 wrote:i still can't decide whether profs do a bad job of explaining what restatements are, or if 1Ls are too dumb to understand.


I will help you decide: law professors are completely useless. I don't know what I would do without Emmanuel, seriously.



Return to “Forum for Law School Students�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests