duty-general Flashcards

1
Q

define the RPP standard

A

duty to act as a Reasonably Prudent Person would under the same or similar circumstances

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

what case define that RPP standard is objective?

A

Vaughan v Menlove - haystacks

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

what is the duty of care for a minor?

A

SOC of similar age/experience - BUT only applies in age-appropriate activities

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

what is the duty of care for the elderly?

A

SOC of an ordinary person suffering from the same/similar infirmities

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

when is insanity a defense that precludes liability?

A

ONLY when it affects D’s ability to understand or appreciate importance of duty OR to perform duty - must not have had forewarning

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

what is the case that illustrates duty of care exception for insanity?

A

Breunig/Batman case

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

duty of care of institutionalized person?

A

not liable because they can’t appreciate or control their conduct

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

what does the Yania case say about legal duty to rescue?

A

no legal duty to rescue someone from peril unless D placed P in that peril (fell in ditch)

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

define misfeasance

A

when the D is responsible for making P’s position worse (D created a risk)

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

define non-feasance

A

when the D has failed to aid P through beneficial intervention

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

What happened in the Weirum/RKO case?

A

misfeasance - D was liable because KHJ created an unreasonable risk of harm (radio contest)

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

what are the three main exceptions to the “no duty to rescue” rule?

A

D’s negligence places P in a position of peril; voluntarily assumed duties; special relationships

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

What did the Day/Waffle House case say?

A

rescue doctrine - injured rescuer can recover from party whose negligence caused the party to be in a dangerous situation

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

what’s the rescue doctrine?

A

negligence to the victim constitutes liability for negligence to the rescuer

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

what did the Florence/Goldberg case say about Voluntarily Assumed Duties?

A

when a duty is assumed, it must be performed in a non-negligent manner, even if the duty wouldn’t have otherwise existed if it hadn’t been voluntarily assumed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what’s the “special relationship” rule that constitutes an exception to the “no duty to rescue” rule?

A

there’s no duty to control conduct of a 3P and prevent him from causing physical harm unless (1) special relationship between D/victim or D/3P and (2) D knew or should have known of potential peril

17
Q

what did the Farwell case say about “special relationships” as an exception to the “no duty to rescue” rule?

A

affirmative duty exists to avoid any affirmative acts that would make the situation worse (drove around his friend who had been beat up)

18
Q

what did the Thompson case say about duty of a public agency to warn of a threat?

A

duty to warn arises only from prior threat to identifiable person (non just non-specific) - therapist whose patient threatened to harm

19
Q

what did the Johnson case say about public duty to warn of potential peril?

A

duty imposed on those who create a foreseeable peril, nt readily discoverable by endangered person, to warn of potential peril - State put dangerous child in foster home

20
Q

how do courts view contractual duties where parties have expressly agreed to assume some duty that otherwise wouldn’t have been imposed?

A

most courts won’t interfere with contractual allocation of duties between parties of the K