California First-Year Law Students' Exam (Baby Bar) — MCTortsHard
A homeowner purchased a new brand of lawnmower. While using it for the first time, a defect in the blade mechanism caused the blade to detach and fly off, narrowly missing the homeowner but severely damaging a nearby shed. The homeowner sued the manufacturer under strict products liability. What defense is the manufacturer LEAST likely to successfully assert?
- ALack of Causation
- BProduct Misuse
- CComparative Negligence
- DAssumption of Risk
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Assumption of Risk
Assumption of risk requires the plaintiff to knowingly and voluntarily encounter a known risk. Here, the homeowner was using a new lawnmower for the first time; it's highly unlikely they would know and appreciate the specific risk of a blade detaching due to a manufacturing defect. The other defenses are more plausible: misuse (if used improperly), comparative negligence (if the homeowner was careless), or lack of causation (if the damage wasn't from the blade).
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Lack of causation could be asserted if the manufacturer tried to argue the damage to the shed was not actually caused by their product's defect, but by some other factor.
- B. Product misuse could be argued if the homeowner used the lawnmower in an unforeseeable or unintended way, though the facts don't explicitly state this.
- C. Comparative negligence (even in strict liability) might be argued if the homeowner was careless in some way that contributed to the incident, such as failing to read instructions or operating it recklessly.
Assumption of Risk (Strict Products Liability)
In strict products liability, assumption of risk is a defense where the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily encountered a known risk posed by the defective product.
- Requires subjective knowledge of the specific risk.
- Requires voluntary encounter of that risk.
- Often difficult to prove when the defect is latent or unknown to the user.
- Distinguished from comparative negligence, which focuses on unreasonable conduct.
Memory trick: Strict Liability: Defenses are hard, unless they KNEW and DID it.