In the average
personal injury case, the plaintiff needs evidence of negligence on the defendant’s part
in order to win compensation. This entails demonstrating that the defendant
owed a certain duty of care to the plaintiff, failed to meet it, and directly
caused injuries or property damage to the plaintiff. The standards of
evidence are different, however, when the case is built on the doctrine
of strict liability.
Strict liability is a legal policy that makes certain parties inherently
responsible for the effects their actions have on others. In a strict
liability claim, the defendant can be found liable for any harm that his
or her actions caused the plaintiff even without evidence of a specific
act of negligence. Most strict liability claims are filed against product
manufacturers, although they can apply to other parties as well.
Grounds for a Strict Liability Claim
You may have grounds for pursuing a strict liability claim if you have
been injured by:
- A company that designed, manufactured, or sold a dangerously faulty product
- A dog or other pet that attacked without provocation
- A person or organization that endangered you by committing inherently hazardous actions
While the strict liability definition may seem like a straightforward doctrine,
it can be difficult to demonstrate that you have grounds for this kind
of claim. The differences between a negligence claim, a strict liability
claim, and other areas of personal injury law often rely on fine legal
distinctions and subtleties. An experienced personal injury lawyer can
help you determine the best course of action for your case.
Contact an Orlando Personal Injury Lawyer
After reading this strict liability definition, if you think that you or
a loved one has been harmed by another party’s careless actions,
you may be eligible to receive compensation for your medical bills, missed
work, and other losses. To learn more,
contact our Orlando personal injury lawyer.