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.