Unreasonably dangerous definition

Unreasonably dangerous means that the product is dangerous to an extent beyond which would be contemplated by the ordinary and prudent buyer, consumer, or user of that product in that community considering the product's characteristics, propensities, risks, dangers, and uses, together with any actual knowledge, training, or experience possessed by that particular buyer, user, or consumer.

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product is dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics, or that the product because of its dangerous condition would not be put on the market by a reasonably prudent manufacturer or seller assuming that he knew of its dangerous condition.

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product is dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary and reasonable buyer, consumer, or user who acquires or uses the product, assuming the ordinary knowledge of the community or of similar buyers, users, or consumers as to its characteristics, propensities, risks, dangers, and proper and improper uses, as well as any special knowledge, training, or experience possessed by the particular buyer, user, or consumer or which he or she was required to possess.” Ark. Code Ann. § 16- 116-102(7)(A).

Examples of Unreasonably dangerous in a sentence

• Unreasonably dangerous" means that the product is dangerous to an extent beyond which would be contemplated by the ordinary and prudent buyer, consumer, or user of that product in that community considering the product's characteristics, propensities, risks, dangers, and uses, together with any actual knowledge, training, or experience possessed by that particular buyer, user, or consumer.

• Unreasonably dangerous is defined under Conn ecticut law using the “consumer expectation” standard, “which provides that ‘the article sold must be dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics.” Id. at 214–15 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, cmt.

• Machine must not be driven with personnel in the work platform” is inadequate since the warning does not define what is meant by“Approved Work Platform.” In short, from our reading of the Complaint, it appears that Plaintiffs advanced three theories of products liability in this case: (1) Defective condition, (2) Unreasonably dangerous, and (3) Duty to warn.

• Unreasonably dangerous means “[t]he article sold must be dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics” (the consumer expectations test).

• Unreasonably dangerous is defined under Connecticut lawusing the “consumer expectation” standard, “which provides that ‘the article sold must be dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics.” Id. at 214–15 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, cmt.

More Definitions of Unreasonably dangerous

Unreasonably dangerous means that the product was dangerous to an extent beyond which would be contemplated by the ordinary and prudent buyer, consumer, or user of that product in that community considering the product’s characteristics, propensities, risks, dangers, and uses together with any actual knowledge, training, or experience possessed by that particular buyer, user, or consumer.” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-702. The Stembridges argue that the manufacturing defects in the crumlets caused them to be unreasonably dangerous because an ordinary and prudent mink rancher would not expect supplemental crumlet, which is marketed as a complete feed, to cause vitamin E deficiency, immunosuppression, death, and diminished production. An ordinary mink rancher would not assume that the Reproduction Crumlet had insufficient levels of vitamin E and fat or that the Lactation Crumlet contained monensin, which

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product is dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary and reasonable buyer, consumer or user who acquires or uses the product, assuming the ordinary knowledge of the community or of similar buyers, users, or consumers as to its characteristics, propensities, risks, dangers,

Unreasonably dangerous means dangerous when used in an ordinary way, and dangerous to an extent beyond that contemplated by an ordinary consumer.

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product is dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics[.]” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29–28–102(2) & (8). “Th[is] consumer expectation test assesses ‘whether the product’s condition poses a danger beyond that expected by an ordinary consumer with reasonable knowledge.’ ” Tatham v. Bridgestone Americas Holding, Inc., 473 S.W.3d 734, 750 (Tenn. 2015) (quoting Ray ex rel. Holman v. BIC Corp., 925 S.W.2d 527, 529 (Tenn. 1996)). “Put another way, ‘[u]nder this test, a product is not unreasonably dangerous if the ordinary consumer would appreciate the condition of the product and the risk of injury.’ ” Id.

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product is dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics, ... .

Unreasonably dangerous means.” He maintains that “unreasonable risk of danger” as used in section 1170.126 was defined in Proposition 47, which took effect in early November 2014, long after the superior court denied defendant’s petition.

Unreasonably dangerous means that a product has a propensity for causing physical harm beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary user or consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the foreseeable class of users as to its characteristics. Krajewski, 469 F.3d at 708-09; Rahmig v. Mosley Mach. Co., Inc., 412 N.W.2d 56, 69 (Neb. 1987) (adopting consumer expectations test for strict liability under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A). A product may be defective and unreasonably dangerous because the product was sold without sufficient warnings or instructions. Id.; Haag, 589 N.W.2d at 329.