Chapter 6 Flashcards
How does the law define a tort?
A civil wrong, other than a breach on contract
What type of law has much overlap with torts?
Crimes
Describe three different ways a person may cause injury and be held liable
- if the person casued the injury intentionally
- by accident
- without any fault at all (sometimes)
What are the two elements of an intentional tort?
- the intention to commit the tort
2. the doing of it
Be able to identify and describe three defenses to intentional torts.
• Consent
o Example: a person who is an cage fighter enters the cage and gets hit- he consented, otherwise that would be battery
• Privilege
o The nature of a relationship can provide privilege to engage in conduct that would otherwise be an intentional tort
o Example: parent spanking child if they are bad
• Self-Defense and Defense of other/property
o Few states allow deadly force with property
o in self-defense, deadly force may be allowed
What is the important issue that arises when it comes to the defense of self, others, or property?
how much force may be used under these circumstances
Be familiar with the facts and ruling(s) in the Katko v. Briney case (p. 156).
Defendant was distressed by a series of break-ins at his farmhouse, he and his wife wired a shotgun to go off and shoot leg-level if the door to the barn was opened. Katko broke in to the barn – injured by the shot gun. He sued them and won $$. Briney’s appealed, but supreme court held that the gun was not justifiable against a trespasser. May have been different if they broke into their home instead of janky barn.
Be able to identify what failure results in negligence.
Failure to exercise reasonable care- that causes injury to another
What are the four requirements for proving a negligence case?
- the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care
- the duty was breached
- the breach of duty was the cause of the plaintiffs injuries
- plaintiff must prove the harm suffered
What degree of care does the common law require each person to exercise?
A degree of care which a reasonable person in the same situation would have exercised.
• One who has held their selves out as a professional/expert, is held to a higher standard
As it relates to the breach of a duty of care, what does the court determine as a matter of law and what is the jury’s task?
The court determines if the defendant acted reasonably or not.
Be able to describe the general rule and public policy implications of the doctrine of proximate cause.
Proximate cause is the direct cause of the defendants injuries.
• Plaintiff must prove there was no intervening event between the defendants breach and the plaintiff’s injury. (the defendants actions were the direct cause of the plaintiffs damages)
What does it mean for a plaintiff to establish a prima facie case?
Establishing all the elements of the cause of action
How is proof different for affirmative defenses as opposed to just defending a case?
Affirmative defenses are when the defendant has the burden to prove
Be able to identify and describe the three historic affirmative defenses.
- contributory negligence
• came to be during the beginning of railroads
• if the plaintiff had to any degree contributed to his own injuries, he could collect nothing - assumption of risk
• if the plaintiff willingly puts themselves in a position of danger, they cant complain when they are injured. - fellow servant rule
• no longer is the law
• if the plaintiff’s injuries would not have occurred but for the negligence of a fellow co-worker the defendants employer was not liable.
