§ 32-41 Products Liability - Strict Liability Cause of Action

• Library: South Carolina Requests to Charge - Civil (SCBar) (2016 Ed.)

§ 32-41 Products Liability - Strict Liability Cause of Action

In a products liability case, the plaintiff is required to prove:

(1) he was injured by the product;
(2) the injury occurred because the product was in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to the user; and
(3) that the product at the time of the accident was in essentially the same condition as when it left the hands of the defendant.

The plaintiff alleges a strict liability cause of action. The plaintiff claims the defendant violated section 15-73-10 of the Defective Products Act.

South Carolina Code section 15-73-10 states:

(1) One who sells any product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or to his property is subject to liability for physical harm caused to the ultimate user or consumer, or to his property, if

(a) The seller is engaged in the business of selling such a product, and
(b) It is expected to and does reach the user or consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.

(2) The rule stated in subsection (1) shall apply although

(a) The seller has exercised all possible care in the preparation and sale of his product, and
(b) The user or consumer has not bought the product from or entered into any contractual relation with the seller.

The plaintiff claims that the product was sold by the defendant in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the person who is expected to use or be affected by the use of the product.

Generally speaking, the doctrine of "strict liability" is a rule under which liability is imposed, without regard to the exercise of reasonable care, on one who sells a product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer, for physical harm caused to the ultimate user or consumer, or to his property, if the seller is engaged in the business of selling such product, and the product is expected to and does reach the user or consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.

Under strict liability, recovery by a plaintiff may be had even though a seller has exercised all possible care in the preparation and sale of his product. The exercise of due care in the manufacture of a product will not relieve the manufacturer of liability. Rather, a plaintiff need only prove the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous when it was placed in the stream of commerce. Thus, the focus is upon the product itself, not the conduct of the manufacturer.

The...