Investigating the possibility of Negligent Tort

1707 Words4 Pages
In modern society such as the United States, consumers expect products they purchase to be safe and dependable. However, that is not always the case with some products. Some business will do everything possible to ensure their product meet or exceed standard set by the company and governmental regulatory agencies. On the other hand, there are some businesses whose main objective is to make profits and will sometime disregard the safety of their product and sale it to the consumer anyway. Then, again there are some company who have the best intent when selling their product however, there are unintentional circumstance that may occur which lead to liability for the company.

Anytime a company sale a product and cause harm to the consumer they can be found to be liable. There are cases where companies face liability, even when there is was no “intent” implicated instead; the torts are considered unintentional (Seaquist & Coulter, 2012). These types of torts are known as torts of negligence, and are considered the most commonplace types of torts encountered by business executives and one of the most costly (Seaquist & Coulter, 2012).

According to Seaquist & Coulter (2012) liability may be levied on a defendant even if the defendant was not found to be negligence yet was engrossed in ultra-hazardous activities. Seaquist & Coulter (2012) states this is referred to as “absolute liability”. Seaquist & Coulter (2012) also mention a part of law called “product liability”, that represented a lawsuit based on service contract, negligence, and strict liability. Based on this model, a plaintiff can bring suit against the producers of the product for injuries occurred after the product malfunctions (Seaquist & Coulter, 2012).

It should be...

... middle of paper ...



Consumer Safety (2014). Gree Expands Dehumidifier Recall to Include GE Brand Dehumidifiers Due to Serious Fire and Burn Hazards Retrieved from

Seaquist, G., & Coulter, K. (2012). Business law for managers. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

Spier, K. E. (2011). Product Safety, Buybacks, and the Post-sale Duty to Warn. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 27(3), 515-539.

Widman, A. (2010). Advancing Federalism Concerns in Administrative Law through a Revitalization of State Enforcement Powers: A Case Study of the Consumer Product Safety and Improvement Act of 2008. Yale Law & Policy Review, 29(1), 165-215.

Wright, R. W. (2007). The Principles of Product Liability. Review of Litigation, 27(1), 1067-1123

More about Investigating the possibility of Negligent Tort

Open Document