Illinois Torts Flashcards
Is there a duty to retreat before using force in self-defense?
In Illinois, a person who is not the original aggressor has no duty to attempt to escape danger before using force. Actual necessity is not a requirement; when a person reasonably believes that she is being or is about to be attacked, she may use such force as is reasonably necessary to protect against injury.
What standard will be applied in a defamation action?
In a defamation action brought by a private person, Illinois courts will apply a negligence standard, as a matter of state law, regardless of whether the publication related to a matter of public concern.
An actual malice standard is required when a defamation case is brought by a public official or public figure.
For which privacy branch invasion does Illinois require πto show actual malice?
All false light cases, regardless of whether a public interest is involved, require a showing of actual malice; i.e., knowledge of the falsity of the publication or reckless disregard of its truth. This requirement is based on the nature of the tort rather than constitutional requirements.
What is the duty of care owed by medical professionals?
A professional or someone with special occupational skills is required to possess the knowledge and skill of a member of the profession or occupation in good standing in similar communities.
In Illinois, a physician’s duty is to exercise the same degree of knowledge, skill and care that a reasonably well-qualified physician in the same or similar community would use under similar circumstances.
Illinois does not apply a national standard, nor does it apply a standard based on only the same community.
Is a child under the age of 17 responsible for its acts?
Unlike other states, which hold that children are held to the standard of a child of like age, education, intelligence, and experience, Illinois follows the “tender years” doctrine, which finds that a child under the age of 7 years is presumed not to be responsible for his acts.
This presumption remains for a child between the ages of 7 and 1; however, for a child of this age, the presumption can be overcome by proof of the intelligence and capacity of the child.
A child who is age 14 or older, or who engages in an adult activity, is held to an adult standard of care.
What duty does an owner/occupier owe to a licensee on his premises?
Illinois rejects the distinction btw licensees & invitees and instead applies a duty of reasonable care to both.
While the status of the entrant on the land is relevant to what constitutes reasonable care, specific standards based on that status are not applied.
Violation of ordinance/statute designed to protect life/property…
In Illinois, the violation of an ordinance/statute designed to protect life or property is only prima facie evidence of negligence.
A clearly stated specific duty imposed by a statute providing for criminal penalties (including fines) may replace the more general common law duty of care if:
(i) π is within the protected class, and
(ii) the statute was designed to prevent the type of harm suffered by π.
Illinois differs from the majority view, whereby an unexcused statutory violation is negligence per se (i.e. it establishes the first 2 elements in the prima facie case, a conclusive presumption of duty and breach of duty).
Note: regardless of the standard applied, the other 2 elements of the prima facie case for negligence, causation and damages, need to be established separately.
How is the zone of danger rule applied?
Although Illinois retains the zone of danger standard for recovery, a π need not suffer physical symptoms from the negligent infliction of emotional distress in order to recover damages. Therefore, a bystander in danger of being physically harmed may recover for damages even if there is no allegation of physical injury or manifestation of symptoms from the emotional distress of the incident.
Illinois does not follow the majority foreseeability test, under which she need not be in the zone of danger but would need to be closely related to the injured pedestrian to recover.
How does failure of πto wear a seat belt in violation of a seat belt statute affect the liability of the insurer?
Failure of π to wear a seat belt in violation of a seat belt statute shall not:
(i) be considered evidence of negligence;
(ii) limit the liability of an insurer; or
(iii) diminish any recovery of damages arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or operation of a motor vehicle.
How is contributory negligence applied?
In Illinois, a π is barred if his fault is more than 50%.
In comparative negligence states, π’s contributory negligence is not a complete bar to recovery. Rather, the trier of fact weighs π’s negligence and reduces damages accordingly.
A majority of states have adopted partial comparative negligence, which still bars π’s recovery if his negligence was more serious than ∆’s negligence.
Is contributory negligence a defense in a strict products liability action?
Illinois does not fully apply its comparative fault rules to strict products liability actions. Therefore, contributory negligence ≠ a defense in a strict liability action when it consists merely of a failure to discover the defect or to guard against the possibility of its existence. However, misuse and assumption of risk constitute misconduct that will be compared in apportionment of damages.
Is an automobile owner liable for the conduct of another driver?
Illinois has not adopted either the family car or permissive use rules; therefore, an automobile owner is not vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of another driver of his car.
Jurisdictions that employ the family car doctrine hold that an owner is liable for tortious conduct of immediate family or household members who are driving with the owner’s express or implied permission. A number of jurisdictions have gone even further by imposing liability on the owner for damage caused by anyone driving with the owner’s consent.
How much may π recover from a child’s parents for the child’s malicious acts?
π harmed by the willful or malicious acts of a child btw the ages of 11 and 19 may recover up to $20,000 in actual damages against the child’s parents for each occurrence, plus costs and attorney’s fees. The amount goes up to $30,000 per occurrence if the conduct is continual.
What does Illinois’ Dramshop Act impose?
Illinois’ Dramshop Act imposes liability on licensed sellers for 3rd party injuries caused by intoxicated persons.
Act also imposes liability on any adult who pays for a hotel room or other facility knowing that it is going to be used for underage drinking, if an intoxicated minor causes injury to another. Because the act imposes no-fault liability on the seller, defenses based on negligence cannot be raised in a Dramshop action.
Is an adult who buys alcohol for a minor responsible for injuries caused by the minor?
By statute, Illinois provides that an adult who willfully supplies alcohol or illegal drugs to a minor, causing the impairment of the minor, is liable for the death, personal injuries, or property damage suffered by the minor or a 3rd person as a result of the impairment.
Foreseeability is not required by the statute.
Note: liability extends to the o/o of nonresidential property who willfully permits consumption of alcohol or illegal drugs on the property that causes or contributes to the impairment of a minor.
