Bar Exam — MBE (Multistate Bar Exam)TortsEasy
A renowned concert pianist, known for his delicate touch, sustained a severe laceration to his hand when a newly purchased, high-end blender malfunctioned during its first use. The blender's blade detached unexpectedly, despite the pianist following all instructions for assembly and operation. An investigation revealed a manufacturing defect in the blade's attachment mechanism. The pianist sued the blender manufacturer. Which of the following legal theories is most likely to result in the pianist's success?
- AIntentional Tort
- BStrict Products Liability
- CNegligence
- DBreach of Warranty
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: B. Strict Products Liability
Strict products liability holds manufacturers liable for defective products that cause injury, regardless of fault. The manufacturing defect and the resulting injury to the pianist, despite proper use, strongly support a strict products liability claim.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. An intentional tort requires intent to cause harm, which is not present in a product malfunction.
- C. Negligence would require proving the manufacturer failed to exercise reasonable care, which is harder than strict liability for a manufacturing defect.
- D. Breach of warranty involves contractual claims, which may apply but strict products liability is a stronger tort claim for physical injury from a defective product.
Strict Products Liability
A legal doctrine holding manufacturers and sellers liable for injuries caused by defective products, regardless of fault or negligence.
- Product was defective when it left the manufacturer's control.
- Defect made the product unreasonably dangerous.
- Defect caused the plaintiff's injury.
Memory trick: Products are STRICTLY for your safety.