Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

blaw > ch 5: Torts and product liability > Flashcards

ch 5: Torts and product liability Flashcards

1
Q

2 notions of tort law

A

wrongs and compensations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is tort law designed for

A

to compensate those who have suffered due to another persons wrongful act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

damage vs damages

A

Damage- refers to harm to persons or property

Damages- referred to as the reward sought as a remedy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Compensatory damages

A

payment given to cover the real value of injuries or damage suffered (given to plaintiff)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

compensatory damage broken into what 2 categories

A

-special
-general

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Special damages

A

compensation based on quantifiable money losses (ex lost wages)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Legislative caps on damages

A

caps ranging from 250,000 to 750,0000

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

General damages

A

compensation for non monetary aspects such as pain or suffering

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Punitive damages

A

-Monetary damages that may be awarded to a plaintiff to punish the defendant from the defendants pocket

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

classification of torts

A

-intentional
-unintentional

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

intentional tort vs unintentional

A

Intentional- when someone causes harm on purpose

Unintentional- when someone causes harm without intending to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Tortfeasor

A

the one committing the tort

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

intent in tort means

A

the person knew the consequences even if the consequence was not their intention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

transferred intent

A

when someone intends to harm someone but accidently harms someone else (still is intentional)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

assuault

A

any intentional and unexcused threat of immediate harmful or offensive contact (words or actions)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

battery

A
  • Physical contact with another that is unexcused, harmful or offensive, and intentionally performed.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

ivy and jean example

A

: ivy threatening jean with the gun and pointing is assualt her actually firing the gun and shooting jean is battery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

how is contact judged

A

Contact offense is judged by what a reasonable person would think and if it is found to be offensive the plaintiff can revive compensation for physical and emotional harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

false impriosnment

A

Confinement of another persons activities without justification

-Can be accomplished thru the use of physical barriers, physical restraint, or threats of physical force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

can business have the right to reasonably detain

A

yes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Intentional infliction of emotional distress
(IIED)

A

extreme/outrages conduct resulting in severe emotional distress to another

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

how does IIED become ationable

A

to be actionable(capable of lawsuit) it must be so extreme it wouldn’t even be accepted by society

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Defamation

A

false statements that are published/ publicly spoken that causes injury to another by hurting their reputation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

libel

A

if the defamatory statement is written/recorded

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Slander

A

if the defamatory statement is spoken

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

To establish defamation plaintiff MUST prove

A

That the defendant made a false statement

The statement was about the plaintiff and harmed their rep

The statement was published to at least one other person other than the plaintiff

If a plaintiff is a public figure they must prove actual malice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Statement of fact requirement

A

It is imp to determine if the defendant made a fact or option bc opinions are protected by the first amendment

Only defamatory if it is false and presented as a fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Publication

A

means the statements are shared with people other than the person being defamed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

when publication is considered

A

if someone overhears defamatory statements by chance, it’s also considered publication

Anyone who repeats or republishes defamatory statements can be held liable, even if they reveal the original source.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Damages for libel

A

If someone is found responsible for libel, the plaintiff can receive general damages.

General damages cover things like damaged reputation, humiliation, and emotional distress, even if it’s hard to measure these harms.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Damages for slander

A

For slander cases, the plaintiff must prove they suffered actual loss due to the statement.

Without proving the plaintiff typically cannot win the case or recover damages.

This is because slanderous statements are considered temporary contrast to libel statements which are considered permanent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Defenses to defamation

A

Truth is a defense, so if a defendant can prove the statement is true no defamation occurs

Other defenses apply if a public figure i involved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Privileged communications

A

Some idv. Will not be liable bc they have immunity

Absolute privilege & Qualified privilege

33
Q

absolute privledge

A

statements made by attorneys and judges

34
Q

Qualified privilege

A

applies in situations like employer evaluations, where statements are protected

35
Q

public figures

A

must prove Actual malice-the statement was made knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth.

36
Q

what is a statement of opinion

A

not actionable bc they are protected by the first amendment

37
Q

Actual malice

A

statement made with either knowledge that its false or a reckless disregard of the truth.

38
Q

Invasion of the right to privacy and appropriation

A

People have the right to privacy meaning they are entitled to be free from unwanted attention

39
Q

4 elements to invasion of privacy

A
  1. Intrusion into an individual’s affairs or seclusion
  2. False light
  3. Public disclosure of private facts
  4. Appropriation of identity
40
Q

Intrusion into an individual’s affairs or seclusion

A

(ex-invading someone’s home, window peeping, etc)

41
Q
  1. False light-
A

publication of info that places a false light on a person

42
Q

Public disclosure of private facts-

A

when a person publicly discloses private info about a indv. That the normal person would find objectionable

43
Q

Appropriation of identity

A
  • using a person’s name, picture, etc. without permission is a tortious invasion of privacy
44
Q

debit card false light case

A

A man reported his debit card as stolen and that someone withdrew funds. They identified who they thought was the woman and posted her image on crimestoppers, however it was in fact not her, she sued for false light and won.

45
Q

appropriation singer case

A

a ad company asks singer to make an ad w her voice she rejects but then they get someone who imitates the singer- this would be an appropriation of identity

46
Q

Fraudulent misrepresentation

A

Misrepresentation either by mistake or by leaving out a specific fact, knowingly made with the intention of deceiving another

47
Q

for fraud to occur more than just what must occur…

A

puffery (exaggeration)

48
Q

statement of fact vs optinion

A

Fraud occurs when someone relies on a statement of fact

Can involve an opinion if the person has expertise ex a lawyer giving opinion may be considered a fact

49
Q

negligent misrepresentation

A

When false info is given without the intent but because of their carelessness and lack of knowledge of the statements falsity

Liability arises when the person giving the info had a duty of care to acc provide accurate info

50
Q

Business tort

A

wrongful interference with another businesses rights

51
Q

Wrongful Interference with a Contractual Relationship which 3 elements must occurs

A

-A valid, enforceable contract must exist between two parties.

-A third party must know that this contract exists.

-The third party must intentionally induce a party to breach the contract.

52
Q

opera singer wrongful interference case

A

opera singer wagner had a contract to sing for lumley but a dude named gye knew of this contract but enticed wagner to sing for gye which constituted a tort as it interfered with their contract and also wagner did a breach of contract

53
Q

Wrongful interference with a business relationship

A

Businesses do many things to attract customers but wrongful interference occurs when they unreasonably interfere with another business in attempts to gain from it and it is considered predatory as it is in attempt to drive them out of the market

54
Q

Intentional Torts against Property

A

includes trespassing land, trespassing personal property, and conversion as it interferes with a person’s rights to their land or personal property

includes real and personal property

55
Q

real vs personal property

A

Real - land and things permanently attached to the land (house)

Personal- all other items that are movable (furniture)

56
Q

does actual harm on the land have to occur to prove tresspass

A

no

56
Q

Trespass to Land

A

occurs when a person
Enters on, above, or below the surface that is owned by another

Causes anything to enter onto land owned by another

Remains on land owned by another or permits anything to remain on it

57
Q

Trespass to Personal Property

A

When someone wrongfully takes or harms someone elses property and interferes with the lawful owners ability to use their property (ex when that guy took my headphones)

57
Q

defenses to trespass

A

If the trespass was warrentend (ex someone fell and someone went to savge them)

If the person had a license

58
Q

warrented personal trespass

A

The only time it is warranted if its a defense ex a auto shop keeping a car when the customer doesn’t pay for the repairs

59
Q

conversion

A

When someone deprives the owner of their property without permission or cause

Related to trespass as taking the item is trespassing and then wrongfully keeping it is conversion

Even the person was initially allowed to take it, if they don’t return it, it can be considered conversion

60
Q

To succeed in a negligence action plaintiff must prove

A

Duty- The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.

Breach- The defendant breached that duty.

Causation in fact- The plaintiff’s injury would not have occurred without the defendant’s breach.

Proximate causation- The connection btw the defendant’s breach and plaintiff’s injury is foreseeable therefore justifies imposing liability.

Damages-The plaintiff suffered a legally recognizable injury.

61
Q

Negligence

A

When someone gets injured bc of the negligence of another.

(not intentful and a normal person should see the risk)

62
Q

reasonable care in negligence

A

courts look at what a careful person might to do assess whether it was negligent

63
Q

breach of duty of care

A

May be thru act such as setting a fire or thru ommiusion such as seeing a fire and not saying anything

63
Q

When determining whether duty of care has been breached courts consider..

A

The nature of the act (whether it is outrageous or commonplace).

The manner in which the act was performed (cautiously versus heedlessly).

The nature of the injury (whether it is serious or slight).

64
Q

Duty of care

A

idea that people should act carefully and not harm others- free to do what u want as long as it does not affect others

65
Q

The reasonable person standard

A

Judges how a reasonable person would act in a similar situation and how they should act and uses this to measure negligence and breach of duty of care

66
Q

duty of land owners

A

Landowners must take reasonable care to keep ppl on property safe from harm

67
Q

Duty to Warn Business Invitees of Risks

A

Business invitee- person who is invited onto business premises

Businesses must warm visitors about risks such as wet floors

68
Q

Obvious risks may be an exception

A

Businesses don’t need to warn people about obvious dangers

69
Q

Duty of professionals

A

Ppl with special skills such as doctors are held to a higher standard of care and are judged by what a reasonable professional in their field would do not by the average person

bc of this they can be sued for malpractice (professional negligence)

70
Q

causation

A

To decide whether there is causation

Was the defendant’s conduct the cause of the injury

Was it the proximate cause

71
Q

Causation in fact

A

Means the injury happened bc of the defendants actions

72
Q

Proximate cause

A

When the connection btw the act and injury is strong enough to hold someone responsible

They use this to determine which injuries are acc linked to the defendants actions

Involves foreseeability meaning that the defendants actions created a risk of injury

73
Q

Palsgraf v Long Island Railroad co

A

Palsgraf was at train station when at the other end a man was tryna catch a train but it was alr boarding so the guards helped him on in which he dropped his package which then exploded and palsgraf got injured. Palsgraf tried to sue claiming that the guards were negligent in their duty to care however that risk was not a foreseeable risk so she did not win.

74
Q

The Injury Requirement and Damages

A

For tort to be committed the plaintiff MUST have suffered a legally recognizable injury bc if there is no harm, loss, etc, there is nothing to compensate

74
Q

Good Samaritan Statutes

A

Statute that protects ppl who help in emergencies for ex doctors unless they purposely act recklessley

75
Q

assumtion of risk

A

The plaintiff knew and accepted the risk.

blaw (16 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions