SUPPOSE THE ACCIDENT INVOLVES AN INHERENTLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITY?
There are many activities that are inherently dangerous, such as using explosives to demolish a building, or keeping wild animals on exhibit in a circus. Yet these activities can be helpful to society generally. As a result the courts have created a doctrine of “strict liability” that attempts to balance the competing interests of allowing socially beneficial dangerous activities while “making whole” persons who may be injured as a result of such activities. If the facts involve what your state considers a “strict liability” situation, it does not matter how careful the user of explosives may be or how experienced she was. Even if everyone thought the explosives expert was doing the job in as safe a manner as possible, anyone “accidentally” injured in his person or property would be entitled to recover the actual damages the explosion caused. Similarly, if the tiger “accidentally” escapes from what the circus thought was an escape proof cage, and roams the neighborhood, the circus is p
