A Revisionist History of Products Liability by Alexandra D. Lahav :: SSRN

A Revisionist History of Products Liability 54 Pages Posted: 10 Jan 2023 Last revised: 11 Jan 2023 Alexandra D. Lahav Cornell Law School

Date Written: January 9, 2023

Abstract Increasingly courts, including the Supreme Court, rely on ossified versions of the common law to decide cases. This Article demonstrates the risks of this use of the common law. The main contribution of the Article is to demonstrate that the traditional narrative about early products law — that manufacturers were not liable for injuries caused by their products because the doctrine of privity granted producers immunity from suit by the ultimate consumers of their goods — is incorrect. Instead, the doctrinal rule was negligence liability for producers of injurious goods across the United States in the nineteenth century. Courts routinely ignored or rejected privity arguments and contract was not their paradigm for understanding a producer’s relationship with users of its products. This analysis has implications for how we view the development of the common law today. And it serves as a warning not to rely on potted histories from casebooks in determining what the common law was in the past.

Keywords: torts, products liability, common law, legal reasoning, legal history, privity

Suggested Citation:

Lahav, Alexandra D., A Revisionist History of Products Liability (January 9, 2023). Available at SSRN: ssrn.com/abstract=…

Cuántas citas jurisprudenciales de nuestro Tribunal Supremo estarán influídas por la selección realizada por las editoriales que les sirven las bases de datos. Qué herramientas utilizan.