New Hampshire
How Enright v. Eli Lilly & Co. applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
In New Hampshire, tort law follows the principles established by the Restatement (Second) of Torts and emphasizes the importance of strict liability in product cases, similar to the precedent set in Enright v. Eli Lilly & Co. State courts focus on the safety and efficacy of products when determining liability.
New Hampshire courts apply a standard of strict liability when analyzing claims related to defective products, requiring proof that the product was unreasonably dangerous.
Held that the plaintiff could recover for damages caused by a defective product under strict liability principles.
Confirmed that a manufacturer could be liable for damages if a product poses a danger to consumers, regardless of negligence.
Affirmed that strict liability applies to failures in the design of a product that lead to injury.
New Hampshire's approach to strict liability in torts is consistent with federal standards, particularly those articulated in Restatement (Second) of Torts, which also emphasizes the burden of proof on the plaintiff to demonstrate product defectiveness. However, New Hampshire may offer broader interpretations of liability, reflecting a more consumer-friendly stance.
Understanding the principles from Enright v. Eli Lilly & Co. and their application in New Hampshire is crucial for the tort section of the bar exam, particularly in product liability questions.