What is Strict Liability?

Strict liability is a legal principle that holds someone responsible for injuries or damages without requiring proof of negligence or intent to cause harm. Under this rule, you can recover compensation even if the defendant took reasonable precautions, as long as their product, animal, or activity directly caused your injury. This differs from typical personal injury cases, where you must prove the other party was careless or at fault.

Strict liability applies in specific situations that the law considers inherently dangerous, including defective products, dangerous animals, and abnormally hazardous activities like using explosives. 

In Nevada, this legal doctrine can provide a more straightforward path to compensation for injury victims because it removes the burden of proving negligence, focusing instead on whether the defendant’s actions or products caused your harm.

Beyond Negligence: Introducing Strict Liability in Personal Injury Law

Strict liability is a legal rule that holds a person or company responsible for injuries caused by their actions or products, regardless of fault or intent. This means you can be held liable even if you were not negligent and took all reasonable precautions to prevent harm.

For example, if a company manufactures a defective product that injures a consumer, the company is responsible for the damages even if it followed every safety protocol during manufacturing. The key difference is that the injured person doesn’t need to prove the company was careless or made a mistake.

This legal principle exists in both criminal and civil law, but it’s most commonly applied in personal injury claims. In these cases, you are called the plaintiff if you’re injured, and the party being sued is the defendant.

Strict Liability Vs Negligence

The main difference between strict liability and negligence is whether you need to prove fault. In a negligence case, you must prove the defendant failed to act with reasonable care, which directly caused your injury. In a strict liability case, you only need to show that the defendant’s action or product directly caused your harm.

Here’s how they differ:

• Burden of Proof: Negligence requires proving the defendant was at fault, while strict liability does not
• Intent: Negligence examines whether the defendant’s conduct was reasonable, but strict liability makes intent irrelevant
• Available Defenses: Defendants have more ways to fight negligence claims than strict liability claims

For instance, if a distracted driver hits your car, that’s a negligence claim because the driver breached their duty to drive safely. However, if a defective airbag in your vehicle deploys and injures you, the manufacturer can be held responsible under strict liability without you needing to prove they were careless.

What Cases Use Strict Liability?

Strict liability doesn’t apply to all injury cases. It’s reserved for specific situations that the law considers inherently dangerous and a risk to public safety. Nevada law generally recognizes three main categories where strict liability applies.

Strict Product Liability

Strict product liability holds manufacturers, distributors, and sellers responsible for injuries caused by a defective product. This means anyone in the product’s chain of distribution can be held accountable if a defect causes harm.

There are three main types of product defects:

• Manufacturing Defects: Errors that happen during production, making a specific product unsafe, like a contaminated batch of medicine
• Design Defects: Flaws in the product’s original design that make the entire product line unreasonably dangerous, such as a vehicle model prone to rolling over
• Warning Defects: When a manufacturer fails to provide adequate instructions or warn consumers about non-obvious dangers

Expert testimony is often needed to prove these defects exist and caused your injuries. The key is showing that the defect was present when the product left the manufacturer’s control.

Dangerous Animals

An owner can be held strictly liable when their animal injures someone. The law often distinguishes between wild animals and domestic animals based on the level of danger they pose.

Owners of wild or exotic animals are almost always strictly liable for any harm they cause. These animals are considered inherently dangerous regardless of training or containment efforts.

In Nevada, dog owners may face strict liability if they knew or should have known their dog was dangerous or had vicious tendencies. This differs from the one-bite rule in some other states, where an owner might not be liable for the first time their dog bites someone.

Abnormally Dangerous Activities

Some activities are considered so inherently risky that anyone who engages in them is automatically liable for any harm that results. Even if all safety precautions are taken, the risk of damage cannot be eliminated.

These activities must be uncommon in the community and pose foreseeable risks. Common examples include:

• Using explosives or blasting operations
• Storing large quantities of flammable liquids or toxic chemicals
• Transporting nuclear materials or hazardous waste
• Operating hazardous waste disposal sites
• Crop dusting with dangerous pesticides

What Are The Elements Of A Strict Liability Claim?

Although proving a strict liability claim is often simpler than proving negligence, you must still establish several key elements. The specific elements depend on the type of case you’re pursuing.

Elements In Product Liability Cases

To succeed in a strict product liability claim in Nevada, you need to demonstrate that specific key legal requirements are met. 

First, the product had a manufacturing, design, or warning defect that made it unreasonably dangerous.

Second, the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s control. 

Third, you were using the product as intended or in a way that was reasonably foreseeable to the manufacturer.

Fourth, the defect was the direct cause of your injuries. This means you must show a clear connection between the product defect and the harm you suffered.

Elements In Abnormally Dangerous Activity Cases

For injuries caused by an abnormally dangerous activity, you must establish different elements. You need to show the defendant was engaged in an activity that’s considered abnormally dangerous by legal standards.

The activity must have created a high risk of harm that couldn’t be eliminated even with reasonable care. It also must not be a matter of common usage in the community where it occurred.

Finally, your injuries must be a direct result of the risks that made the activity abnormally dangerous in the first place.

Elements In Animal Injury Cases

Animal injury cases have the simplest elements to prove. If a wild animal injured you, you only need to demonstrate that the defendant owned or controlled the animal and that it caused your harm.

For injuries caused by a domestic animal in Nevada, you must also prove the owner knew or should have known the animal had dangerous tendencies. This knowledge can be shown through previous incidents, complaints, or the animal’s behavior.

What Damages Can You Recover?

In a successful strict liability claim, you can recover financial compensation for your losses, similar to a negligence case. These damages help restore you to the position you were in before the injury occurred.

Economic Damages cover your tangible financial losses with clear monetary values:

• Medical bills and future treatment costs
• Lost wages and reduced earning capacity
• Property damage and replacement costs
• Rehabilitation and physical therapy expenses
• Out-of-pocket costs related to your injury

Non-Economic Damages compensate you for personal losses that are harder to calculate in dollars:

• Pain and suffering from your injuries
• Emotional distress and mental anguish
• Loss of enjoyment of life and activities
• Permanent scarring or disfigurement
• Loss of companionship or consortium

In rare cases involving extreme misconduct, a court might award punitive damages to punish the defendant. However, these are less common in strict liability claims compared to negligence cases.

What Defenses Can Defeat Strict Liability?

Even though you don’t have to prove fault in a strict liability case, defendants can still raise certain defenses to avoid responsibility. Understanding these defenses helps you prepare a stronger case.

Product Misuse Or Alteration

A manufacturer may not be liable if you were injured while misusing a product in an unforeseeable way. They can also argue they’re not responsible if the product was significantly altered after it left their control and the alteration caused the injury.

For example, if you remove safety guards from machinery and get hurt, the manufacturer might successfully argue you misused their product. The key is whether your use was reasonably foreseeable to the manufacturer.

Assumption Of Risk

This defense applies if you voluntarily and knowingly accepted the risks of a dangerous activity or product. The defendant must prove you understood the specific risk that caused your injury and chose to proceed anyway.

For instance, if you participate in skydiving and the parachute malfunctions, you may have assumed the inherent risks of the activity. However, this defense doesn’t apply to hidden or unexpected dangers.

Comparative Negligence

In Nevada, your compensation can be reduced if you’re partially at fault for your own injuries. Under the state’s modified comparative negligence rule, your awarded damages will be lowered by your percentage of fault.

However, you cannot recover any damages if you’re found to be 51% or more at fault. This rule encourages both parties to act responsibly while still allowing recovery for partially at-fault plaintiffs.

Statute Of Limitations And Repose

A statute of limitations sets a deadline for filing a lawsuit after you discover your injury. In Nevada, you generally have two years from the date of injury to file a personal injury claim.

A statute of repose is an absolute deadline that bars claims after a specific time has passed, regardless of when the injury was discovered. The length of time set by a statute of repose depends on the particular product and relevant laws.

Compliance And Preemption

In some cases, defendants can argue they’re protected from liability because they fully complied with federal safety regulations. This defense, known as federal preemption, sometimes applies to products like FDA-approved medical devices.

The idea is that federal agencies have expertise in regulating certain products, and their approval should shield manufacturers from state law claims. However, this defense has limitations and doesn’t apply in all situations.

Is Strict Liability Different In Nevada?

While the core principles of strict liability are similar across the country, Nevada has specific laws that can affect your claim. Understanding these state-specific rules is crucial for building a successful case.

Strict Product Liability In Nevada

Nevada follows standard strict liability law for defective products, meaning you don’t need to prove a manufacturer was negligent. However, the state applies its modified comparative fault rule, so your percentage of fault will reduce your recovery.

Nevada courts have consistently held manufacturers responsible for defective products that cause injuries. The state’s approach favors injured consumers while still allowing defendants to raise appropriate defenses.

Dog Bites In Nevada

Nevada doesn’t have a statute that automatically makes owners strictly liable for all dog bites. Instead, Nevada Revised Statute 41.165 makes owners liable if they knew or should have known their dog was dangerous or vicious.

“Dangerous” typically means the dog has previously bitten someone or acted aggressively toward people. This knowledge can be proven through witness testimony, previous complaints, or veterinary records showing aggressive behavior.

Deadlines For Nevada Injury Claims

It’s crucial to file your claim before the legal deadline expires, or you’ll lose your right to seek compensation.

Claim Type	Filing Deadline in Nevada
Personal Injury	2 years from the date of injury
Product Liability	2 years from injury discovery
Wrongful Death	2 years from the date of death

Do I Need A Lawyer For A Strict Liability Case?

Although strict liability cases may seem more straightforward than negligence claims, they’re often complex and challenging to win on your own. Proving that a product was defective or an activity was abnormally dangerous often requires extensive evidence and testimony from expert witnesses.

Insurance companies have teams of lawyers dedicated to fighting these claims and minimizing what they have to pay. They know how to use technical defenses and challenge your evidence to reduce their liability.

At Ladah Injury & Car Accident Lawyers Las Vegas, we understand the tactics insurers use because our attorneys have backgrounds in insurance defense. We know how to build a strong case by conducting thorough investigations, working with leading experts, and calculating the full extent of your damages.

Our goal is to handle all the legal complexities so you can focus on your recovery. We are dedicated to fighting aggressively for maximum compensation on behalf of our clients.

Injured In Las Vegas? Get A Free Case Review

If a defective product, dangerous animal, or hazardous activity has left you or a loved one injured, you may be entitled to compensation under strict liability law. The legal team at Ladah Injury & Car Accident Lawyers, Las Vegas, is here to help you understand your rights and explore your options.

We offer a free, no-obligation consultation to discuss your case and determine if you have a valid strict liability claim. Because we work on a contingency fee basis, you won’t pay us anything unless we successfully recover money for you.

With our commitment to client support and dedication to pursuing justice, we’re ready to stand by your side throughout your case. Don’t let insurance companies minimize your claim or delay your recovery.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can you be held liable under strict liability even if you weren’t negligent?

Yes, strict liability holds you responsible for damages regardless of whether you acted negligently or intended to cause harm. The focus is on the dangerous nature of the activity or product, not your level of care.

Which parties can be sued in a strict product liability case?

You can file a claim against anyone in the product’s distribution chain, including manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers who sold the defective product. Each party in the chain can be held responsible for your injuries.

How does Nevada’s comparative negligence rule affect strict liability cases?

If you’re found partially at fault for your injuries, your compensation will be reduced by your percentage of fault. You cannot recover any damages if you’re 51% or more to blame for the incident.

What types of activities qualify as abnormally dangerous under strict liability?

Activities like blasting with explosives, storing hazardous chemicals, transporting nuclear materials, and operating waste disposal sites typically qualify. The activity must pose high risks that can’t be eliminated through reasonable care and be uncommon in the community.

How do you prove a product defect in a strict liability case?

Product defects are typically proven through expert testimony, product testing, manufacturing records, and evidence of similar incidents with the same product. You must show that the defect existed when the product left the manufacturer’s control.

What is Nevada’s deadline for filing strict liability claims?

Nevada gives you two years from the date of injury to file most personal injury lawsuits, including strict liability claims. Missing this deadline typically means losing your right to seek compensation forever.