Case Rules

Question 1

Should an individual who is suddenly stricken unconscious be held liable for tortuois conduct?

Is it a matter of negligence or strict liability?

Answer 1

Hammontree v. Jenner

A person who is stricken by a sudden medical emergency may be held legally liable only in the event that they were negligent in handling their condition

Facts: man with well controlled epilepsy has a seizure while driving, drives through storefront

Question 2

When does an employer become responsible for their employee’s conduct?

Answer 2

Christensen v. Swenson

Respondeat superior applies when the employee was acting within the scope of their employment, were not on a personal endeavor, and it took place within the hours and ordinary spatial boundaries of workplace operation

This is strict liability

Facts: employee drives off premises for lunch, this was regular practice although not explicitly allowed, hits a pedestrian

Question 3

When can an employer be held liable for their employee’s actions if they act beyond the scope of their duties?

Answer 3

Ira S. Bushey & Sons v. U.S.

An employer can be held liable for their employee’s actions if it is a result of a characteristic risk inherent in the type of work or employee

Facts: drunken sailor spins valves, causes ship to sink

Question 4

Does intent require a desire to cause harm in the instance of battery? What intent is required?

Answer 4

Garratt v. Dailey

General intent is required. Desire to cause harm is not required. The intent to do the action (i.e. pulling a chair) is enough. You must know with substantial certainty that a person will be affected by your actions, you must intend the unauthorized contact, and there must be an obvious result.

Facts: 5 year old pulls chair from under elderly woman, she is injured

Question 5

When a person intends a contact, but the results are far more severe than could have been reasonably foreseen, what is the D liable for?

Answer 5

Vosberg v. Putney

once the D causes harm to the P, the D is liable for the entire extent of the damage, whether it could or could not be foreseen by him

Facts: boys in 2nd grade, one taps other with foot, leg becomes unusable

(Eggshell Plaintiff rule)

Question 6

What intent is required to prove trespass?

Answer 6

Dougherty v. Stepp

The only intent required to prove trespass is the intent to enter the land; damage is inevitable

Every unauthorized and therefore unlawful entry into the close of another is trespass

Facts: man surveys land to find his property boundaries, enters neighbor’s land

Question 7

Whether malice is required to prove assault and battery?

Answer 7

Picard v. Barry Pontiac-Buick, Inc.

You must have general or specific intent, malice is not required, there must be harmful or offensive contact or imminent apprehension of such contact. If you touch something a person is holding, that is considered battery.

Assault=apprehension; Battery=contact

Facts: mechanic touched woman’s camera

Question 8

Is intangible property subject to the claim of conversion

Answer 8

Thyroff v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.

Electronic documents that are stored on a computer and are indistinguishable from printed documents are subject to a claim of conversion.

Facts: individual given software and harware from his job, they terminate his and withold his client files located on the software

Question 9

Is moral pressure enough to constitute force in false imprisonment?

Are there special privileges for shopkeepers in false imprisonment?

Answer 9

**Lopez v. Winchell’s Donut House **

Moral pressure is insufficient to constitute force

Shopkeepers may question their employees if they reaonably suspect them of criminal activity as long as the duration and manner is reasonable

Fact: woman willingly went into back room, questioned by employer

Question 10

When does IIED apply?

Answer 10

Womack v. Eldridge

One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress absent any bodily injury. The conduct has to be beyond moral sensibilities and common decency. Determined by culture. “Outrageous” Gap-filling tort

Facts: investigator fraudulently obtained pictures of a man, not accused, his picture became associated w/child molestation trial, suffered extreme emotional trauma

Question 11

Can you consent to illegal activity?

Can you recover if you are injured during an illegal activity?

Is malice required?

Answer 11

Hart v. Geysel

Majority rule: A fight in anger each is liable for harm caused, you cannot consent to illegal activity, you cannot profit from illegal activity

Minority rule: If combat takes place in anger, and excessive force is used you can recover, if no excessive force then you can’t recover

Interest to choose is protected. We choose what contats we are willing to receive.

Facts: two men enter into a prize fight, one dies

Question 12

If one appears to outwarldy consent and acts in a way that could indicate consent, can a court rule consent was not given if inner desires are to not consent?

Answer 12

O’Brien v. Cunard Steamship Co.

Objective consent is required, the outward manifestation of a subjective intent is what is used to measure consent. Subjective intent is impossible for the D to measure. Not a question of would a reasonable person consent, question of did this person consent.

Facts: woman doesn’t want to be vaccinated, allows herself to be vaccinated anyway

Question 13

Is use of potentially lethal force justified if the person reasonably feels their life is in danger despite the presence of mitigating factors?

Answer 13

Courvoiser v. Raymond

The use of potentially lethal force is justified if the person reasonably feels their life is in danger despite the presence of mitigating factors, detached deflection is not required. Self-defense is situational in nature.

Facts: angry mob outside, plain clothes officer comes out of crowd, man shoots him

Question 14

Can one protect property with instruments capable of force that can cause death or serious injury?

Answer 14

Katko v. Briney

An owner may not protect personal property that is not a dwelling against trespasses and thieves by using force that could cause death or serious injury.

Facts: spring gun trap in unoccupied house

Question 15

If it is necessary to use another’s property in an emergency situation, which an individual has no control over, is the individual liable for damaged to the property of another?

Answer 15

Vincent v. Lake Erie Transportation Co.

The individual is liable for damage to the property of the other.

Majority: No matter what the necessity, the owenr of the property should be able to collect regardless of overwhelming necessity

Dissent: In cases of inevitable accident, if the person used due care, they are not at fault

Facts: huge storm, ship tied to dock, replace breaking cables, dock damaged

Question 16

In the event of an emergency, should you be allowed to use another’s property to protect your self or your property?

Answer 16

Ploof v. Putnam

You should have the privilege of private necessity

Facts: huge storm, dockowner cuts someone’s boat loose, causes serious damage

Question 17

If someone unintentionally causes an injury while doing a lawful activity can they be held liable?

Answer 17

Brown v. Kendall

A person cannot be held liable for unintentionally injuring someone while doing a lawful act unless it was done in the want of exercise of due care.

Facts: dog fight, man with stick hits other man in eye on accident

Question 18

Can a person be held negligent for an unforeseeable act when all reasonable precautions have been taken?

Answer 18

Adams v. Bullock

When an act is unforeseeable or prohibitively expensive to prevent, then a person may not be found negligent unless they have not taken all reasonable precautions

People have to take reasonable precautions against foreseeable harms. It’s not about whether the accident is possible, it’s about whether the accident is probable.

Facts: boy swings 8ft wire, gets electrocuted

Question 19

Is a person who brings something dangerous onto their property responsible for its escape even when all reasonable precautions have been taken?

Answer 19

Rylands v. Fletcher

The person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and, if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape. The only time your are not liable is if an act of God occurs or the Plaintiff causes the thing to be released.

Facts: man builds reservoir near abandoned mine shaft, water escapes destroys P’s property, D didn’t take enough precautions

Answer 20

Indiana Harbor Belt R.R. Co. v. American Cyanamid Co.

Question 21

When is it an owner’s duty to protect against injuries from property that is harmful if not controlled?

Answer 21

United States v. Carroll Towing Co.

There is a calculus to determine this. There are 3 variables:

Probability of escape
Gravity of the injury
Burden of adequate precautions
B< p=””> <>

Hand Formula

Facts: bargee is absent, barge sinks

Question 22

Do you have to take utmost care or reasonable care depending on the circumstances?

Answer 22

Bethel v. New York City Transit Authority

The standard is always reasonable care, but sometimes reasonable care equals utmost care because it depends on the circumstances.

Parameters: Probability of risk, magnitude of harm, and special relationship between actor and the victim

Facts: defective handicapped seat on public bus

Question 23

If there is an established custom, is duty breached when somebody does not follow common custom and someone is injured as a result?

Answer 23

**Trimarco v. Klein **

If common practice conforms to the reasonable person standard, duty is breached and you are negligent if you don’t comply. Common practice shows how people should react in certain situations and reflects the jugment and expertise of many. It is not a test alone of negligence. Compliance to custom can be used defensively. Only creates strict liability or complete defense in Med. Mal. cases.

Facts: man falls through glass shower enclosure

Question 24

When using an argument of custom in medical malpractice, is adherence to custom a complete defense?

Is custom local or national?

Answer 24

Sheeley v. Memorial Hospital

Adherence to custom in med mal cases is a complete defense. Non-adherence is strict liability negligence. If there are two schools of thought, as long as the minority opinion is highly regarded, it constitutes custom. Custom is national.

Facts: vagina procedure goes wrong, gets infected

Question 25

When can violation of a statute become tortious action?

Answer 25

Martin v. Herzog

Violation of a safety statute is negligence per se. Courts may, but are not required to, adopt laws as the standard of care.

Facts: man on wrong side of road gets hit by car with no lights on around blind corner

Question 26

When is it permissible to disregard a safety statute?

Answer 26

Tedla v. Ellman

A person cannot be faulted for not following a safety statute when strict observance of the rule may defeat the purpose of the rule and produce catastrophic results.
Deviation from a statute without a good cause is considered negligence. When legislation speaks they establish the reaonable care standard, but you are not required to follow it if it would put you in danger

Facts: junk collectors hit by car after walking on wrong side of road when correct side of road was extremely busy

Question 27

What is required to infer negligence?

Answer 27

Negri v. Stop and Shop, Inc.

Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for jury to draw reasonable inference of negligence.

Facts: broken baby food jars, store had constructive notice, didn’t clean, woman injured

Question 28

What kind of notice is required to establish negligence?

Answer 28

Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History

Constructive or actionable notice is required to establish a PFC for negligence

Facts: man slips on hotdog paper

Question 29

Is evidence of negligence required to establish causation?

Answer 29

Byrne v. Boadle

In some cases, causation can arise from the fact of an accident. Established Res Ipsa Loquitur.

Facts: flour barrel falls on pedestrian

Question 30

Should mere presence of an accident indicate negligence?–Res Ipsa

Answer 30

McDougald v. Perry

The mere presence of an accident does not necessarily indicate neglience. If it is more likely than not that negligence occurred, then someone must be held responsible and Res Ipsa is applied. It is applied based on the type of event and if the conclusion is a matter of general knowledge.

Facts: tire falls out of cradle, hits a woman’s car

Question 31

Is it required in cases of hospital injury for the P to know both the person and the instrumentality that caused the injury?

Answer 31

Ybarra v. Spangard

In cases with multiple defendants in med mal cases, each D is responsible for exonerating themselves by providing evidence of their innocence, or by providing evidence of another D’s guilt.

This is an exceptional case.

Instrumentality must be under D’s control, and P cannot contribute to negligence. Instrumentality can include P’s body

Facts: surgery for appendix, injury not in the same region of surgery

Question 32

Does a person have a duty to warn people coming onto their property of all dangers on or around their property?

Answer 32

Harper v. Herman

Superior knowledge of a dangerous situation in itself, in the absence of a duty to provide protection, is insufficient to establish liability in negligence. An affirmative duty to act only arises when a special relationship exists between the parties. All people should recognize dangers of fire or water.

Facts: guest on boat dives into shallow water, becomes quadriplegic

Question 33

Does a person have an affirmative duty to prevent future harm?

Answer 33

Farwell v. Keaton

People on a common undertaking have a created a special relationship to prevent harm to each other. Once they begin to help. they have an obligation to not leave them in a worse condition than they started.

Facts: two street harassers get in a fight, one seriously injured, other one keeps him from hospital, he dies

Question 34

When is somone liable to a third party?

Answer 34

Randi W. v. Muroc Joint Unified School District

An actor who makes a misrepresentation is subject to liability to another for physical harm which results from an act done by the other or a third person in reliance upon the truth of the representation, if the actor intends his statement to induce or should realize that it is likely to induce action by the other, or a third person, which involves an unreasonable risk of
physical harm to the other, and knows the statement is false or that he does not have the knowledge he professes

Facts: schools give glowing recommendations for teacher, he molests a student

Question 35

When does a doctor or psychiatrist have a duty to warn a third party of their patient’s conduct?

Answer 35

Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California

A doctor or psychiatrist has a duty to warn potential victims of their dangerous patients if the victim is identifiable, the threat is credible, the harm is foreseeable, the harm is to a third person not property, and the proximity is within a reasonable time

Facts: patient tells psyc. he is going to kill someone, Dr. does nothing, patient kills person

Question 36

Does somebody owe a duty of care to anyone harmed by negligence when a duty is breached to another but harms a third party if the harm is foreseeable?

Answer 36

Strauss v. Belle Realty Co.

A defendant only owes a duty to the plaintiff, not to a third party when the third party does not have privity of contract, even when the harm is forseeable.

Policy: avoid crushing liability, assist determination of duty

Facts: city wide power outage, man falls down defective steps

Question 37

Is merely witholding a benefit a breach of duty?

Answer 37

H.R. Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co.

Merely witholding a benefit does not qualify as a breach of duty because it is not commission of a wrong.

Facts: utility didn’t provide enough water to fire hydrant, warehouse destroyed

Question 38

Do social hosts incur liability for the misconduct of their guests if the social host’s actions contribute to injury of a third party?

Answer 38

Reynolds v. Hicks

Social hosts are not liable for harms caused by their guests to third parties.

Facts: wedding, minor consumed alchohol, left wedding, got in car accident

Answer 39

Carter v. Kinney

Question 40

To whom does a property owner owe a duty of care?

Answer 40

Heins v. Webster County

Property owners owe a duty of care to all people excluding flagrant trespassers

Facts: man enters hospital, slips on way out, injures self

Question 42

How must a plaintiff prove the cause of their harm?

Answer 42

Stubbs v. City of Rochester

A plaintiff does not have to eliminate every other possible way he could have been harmed, he must only prove with reasonable certainty that the defendant’s harm is a direct cause of injury. He must prove that this particular cause is a likely cause of his injury.

Facts: typhoid in the water

Answer 43

Williams v. Utica

Question 44

In a med mal suit, can a person sue for the loss of chance for life or better medical outcome?

Answer 44

Matsuyama v. Birnbaum

Loss of chance permits a P to recover damages in med mal cases where their chance of survival or achieving a better health outcome has been diminished by the D’s negligence

Facts: doctor delays diagnosis on cancer with unique symptoms, fails to diagnose, patient dies 3 months after diagnosis, would have had 40% chance of survival if diagnosed correctly

Question 45

Can two people acting separately be held liable for a harm when there is insufficient evidence to show which D caused the harm?

Answer 45

Summers v. Tice

Multiple defendants may be held wholly liable whether they acted in concert or independently because the D is in a better position to show the cause of injury and the P should not be left remediless.

Facts: hunting, two people shot in same direction, caused injury to P, impossible to determine whose shot hit P

Question 46

Can a plaintiff harmed by a drug recover from a manufacturer when the identification of the producer of the specific drug is impossible?

Majority and Minority Opinions

Answer 46

Hymowitz v. Eli Lilly & Co.

Majority: a national market share theory should be applied, a D should only be able to exonerate themselves if they did not market their product to the specifically harmed P

Minority: a national market share theory should be applied, a D should be able to exonerate themselves if they can prove that a specific P did not take their specific pill using attributes of their specifically manufactered pill

Facts: DES drug caused birth defects in female chilren of women who took drug while pregnant

Question 47

When is a D not held liable for the but-for cause of a harm?

Answer 47

Berry v. Sugar Notch Borough

Even if D’s wrong was a but-for cause of the injury in a given case, no liability ensues unless D’s wrong increases the chances of such harm occurring in general.

Facts: trolley speeding, tree falls on it

Question 48

In a breach of duty, is it required that a negligent D foresee the specific harm caused in order to be held liable?

Answer 48

Polemis

If the D is guilty of negligence he is responsible for all the consequences whether reasonably foreseeable or not as long as it is directly caused by D’s negligence.

Directness test

Facts: plank falls, causing spark, ship destroyed

Question 49

Is a negligent D responsible for all harms caused by their actions?

Answer 49

The Wagon Mound

The test in determining liability should rely on the foreseeability of the harm regardless of whether it was caused directly or indirectly. The D is responsible for probable consequences of the act, foreseeability matters.

Foreseeability/harm within the risk

Facts: oil on water catches fire

Question 50

In the case of the criminal intervention of a third party, can a D be held liable when they did not induce the action?

Answer 50

Doe v. Manheimer

For a harm to be within the scope of the risk, the harm actually suffered must be of the same general type as that which makes the D’s conduct negligent in the first instance. Liability is precluded when there is an intervening act by a third party that is either criminal or intentional, in which case the third party would be held liable for all damages or injuries resulting because they took control of the situation. Probability of the act is to be judged by reasonable person standard. Essential factor is foreseeability.

Facts: overgrown bushes, woman gets raped