Question

Louie buys a new dining room table and four chairs from ABC Furniture which were manufactured by Finest Kind Manufacturing.  The table and chairs come with a one year limited warranty of workmanship and a disclaimer of liability for damages limiting liability to repair and/or replacement of the defective item.  Louie has guests for dinner during which a chair collapses throwing a guest to the floor breaking her wrist. Is Louie liable for her injuries? ABC? Finest Kind? Why or why not? What theories of liability apply? Are there any defenses available of any of the defendants?

Answer 1

Liability for a product defect could rest with any party in the product's chain of distribution, such as:

• The product manufacturer;
• A manufacturer of component parts;
• A party that assembles or installs the product;
• The wholesaler; and
• The retail store that sold the product to the consumer

LOUIE :  Louie will not be liable for the injuries caused to the guest as Louie does not fall in any of the above mentioned category and is only the buyer of the product.

ABC FURNITURE : ABC Furniture is the retail store that sold the product in its normal course of business. Hence liability for the product defect will rest on ABC Furniture if ABC Furniture are not able to identify the original supplier. However, in case if the seller, i.e. ABC Furniture, can successfully identify the original seller of the product, the liability will lie with the original seller. Hence in the present case, the original seller of the product is successfully identifiable, i.e. Finest Kind Manufacturing, therefore, ABC Furniture will not be liable for injuries of the guest.

FINEST KIND MANUFACTURING : Finest Kind is original manufacturer of the product that caused the injury to the guest. Hence, Finest Kind will be liable for the injuries of the guest. The fact that the product comes with the one year limited warranty for the damages limiting to repair and/or replacement of the defective item will not save Finest Kind from the liability for the injuries of the guest.

THEORIES OF LIABILITY:

If you are injured by a product, there are three avenues by which you may recover compensation. These are:

1. BREACH OF WARRANTY : Breach of warranty is based on contract which means there must be privity between the injured person and the seller. Privity basically means direct contact between the parties. Therefore for breach of warranty, the injured person can usually only sue the seller of the product, not the manufacturer or other party who rendered the party defective.
2. NEGLIGENCE : Negligence means lack of due deligence. If some person's or company's negligence causes a product to be defective, they can be held liable for the harm caused. The negligent party can be the manufacturer, the designer, distributor and part supplier, or anyone else who is responsible for the product being defective.
3. STRICT LIABILITY : Strict liability, like negligence, allows the injured party to seek compensation from whoever was responsible for the product being defective. Unlike negligence, the injured person does not need to discover who exactly failed to do their duty. Strict liability requires only that the product be defective and unreasonably dangerous.

In the present case, the theory of STRICT LIABILITY shall apply because neither there is any specific breach of warranty not the manufacturer of the product has been negligent causing the product to be defective (Negligence can not be established from the facts stated in the question). Hence the theory of Strict Liability will apply.

DEFENSES AVAILABLE:

The defenses available to defendants are as follows:

1. The plaintiff misused the product in an unforeseeable way and that his/her misuse of the product cause the injuries alleged.
2. The plaintiff substantially altered the product after it left the manufacturer's control, and this alteration caused the plaintiff's injury.
3. The plaintiff must be able to connect the product with the party responsible for manufacturing or supplying it.