Question

An industrial manufacturing plant was producing large volumes of a new chemical combination to be marketed worldwide that was guaranteed to instantly and humanely kill death row inmates receiving their executions. The plant was blowing the exhaust fumes from the manufacturing process out into the atmosphere through massive industrial fans, apparently to help protect employees inside the complex. On days with a wind in the air, the invisible particles were traveling to adjacent neighborhoods and creating a permanent, invisible coating that was detectable by scientific testing. The highly dangerous chemical film had destroyed a number of residential homes – consulting experts advised the residents to move out of the homes and to raze the structures. These residents brought actions against the manufacturing plant for the damages they suffered, including pain, suffering and distress. What is the likely successful theory that they will assert against the manufacturer? Group of answer choices

Strict liability for an abnormally dangerous condition or activity.

Trespass to land, property and persons.

Environmental destruction under the Superfund Act.

The tort of physical intrusion and impairment.

Answer 1

A) Strict liability for an abnormally dangerous condition or activity

NO, As it was not creating any damage directly to the residents

B) Trespass to land, property and persons

No, Manufacturer has not intruded into the residents lands.

C)Environmental destruction under the Superfund Act.

Yes, Manufacturer can be suied for damaging the environment by releasing dangerous chemicals into air

D)The tort of physical intrusion and impairment.

NO, In the quetion it was not mentioned anything about the intrution.