Intentional Torts 2 Flashcards
IIED is a tort for
Emotional injury only
IIED happens when one who ..
By extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another
First IIED case
Bad joke husband horribly injured but he was not
First element of of recklessness for IIED
Knows risk of harm from conduct OR knows facts that make risk obvious to another in the same situation
Second element of of recklessness for IIED
Precaution to reduce risk so slight compared to magnitude of the risk that it makes failure to take precaution evidence of indifference to the risk
Recklessness elements for IIED
Knows risk of harm from conduct or knows facts that make risk obvious to another person in the same situation AND Precaution to reduce risk so slight compared to magnitude of the risk that it makes failure to take precaution evidence of indifference to the risk
Recklessness is between … and weaker than …
Intention and negligence, substantial certainty
B blood trauma and M knows this, leaves hunting mess while takes walk knowing B will be home soon IIED
Likely, knew or knew facts and precaution so slight, also depends on if extreme and outrageous
B blood trauma and M doesn’t know this, leaves hunting mess while takes walk knowing B will be home soon, hunting town where this is common IIED
Probably not, town not think extreme also M didn’t know even if precaution slight
IIED can arise from knowledge of … but …
Unique sensitivities, proceeding anyways
IIED requires more than … feelings
Insulting or hurting
Outrageous and extreme is an — standard
Objective (what community member might think)
Conduct is extreme and outrageous if it …
Goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is utterly intolerable in a civilized community
GTE Southwest held that ongoing extreme behavior from boss can be IIED if — is outrageous even if…
Pattern of behavior, each individual incidence is not
IIED presents a — for P
High bar of evidence
Jones held that not enough evidence for P that sexual harassment was outrageous because …
Still went to work
A third person can have a claim for IIED if —- OR —-
Affects Member of immediate family present, any other person if distress results in bodily harm
Trespass to land rule
Every unauthorized entry is a trespass and infers some damage (even if you don’t know)
Elements of trespass to land: one
Every unauthorized entry is a trespass if enter another land or cause a third thing or person to
Elements of trespass to land: two
Or remains on land when no longer welcome
Elements of trespass to land: three
OR fails to remove thing from land under duty to remove (lawnmower)
Act you intend for trespass to land is
Going onto property (doesn’t matter if didn’t know private)
What is harm in trespass to land
Entering another’s property (don’t need additional damages)
Would sleepwalking count as trespass to land?
No, must intend consequence (going on land)
Why is entering land itself harm for trespass to land
Violating will of owner (emotional harm)
Release hounds on area of land, know neighbors land nearby no fence Trespass?
Likely yes, substantial certainty
First element trespass to chattels
Interference dispossesses other of their chattel
Second element trespass to chattels
OR causes chattel to be impaired as to its condition, quality or value
Third element trespass to chattels
Deprives possessor of its use for substantial time
Fourth element trespass to chattels
Causes bodily harm to possessor or to some person or thing in which possessor has legally protected interest
When is it trespass to chattels?
Only if interference with the chattel, dispossesses owner of it, causes impairment as to condition quality or value, deprives possessor of its use for substantial time OR causes bodily harm to possessor or some person or third thing in which possessor has legally protectable interest
Hamidi wasn’t trespass to chattels because .. .
No injury to computer or servers, injury worker disruption but workers not chattel
Conversion is — of trespass to chattels
Subset
Conversion is control of chattel where —
So seriously interferes with right of another to possess that actor must pay full value
Examples of conversion
Theft, destruction, deprivation for entire time it was useful (wedding dress)
Consent bears on intentional tort prima facie case by determining..
If conduct was unlawful
If a person — to conduct of another even if intended to invade interests he —
Effectively consents, cannot recover
Consent for torts is —-
Apparent
Common law consent holding (Mohr)
Every unauthorized touching if not in spirit of pleasantry is battery
Policy behind common law consent rule for battery
Every person right to complete immunity from physical interference of others
What is something that could be construed as in the spirit of pleasantry for common law consent rule
Handshake
Anti Mohr rule element 1
Conduct that injures another no liability even without consent when
Anti Mohr rule element 2
An emergency makes it apparently necessary to prevent harm before can get consent
Anti Mohr rule element 3
No reason to believe they would decline
Emergency Action without consent rule
Conduct that injures another doesn’t create liability even when no consent if emergency makes it apparently necessary to prevent harm before they can consent and no reason to believe they would object
—- is almost always considered an emergency
Surgery
Policy behind emergency action no consent rule
Balancing autonomy with interest in allowing people to help each other
In Hackbart (football), recovery only possible if ..
Contact one forbidden by rules of the game (if not consented by playing)
Consent is complicated when contact not part rules of the game but ..
Part of customs (hockey fights)
Consent Qs Flowchart (yes)
Consent? ➡️ If so ,what scope? ➡️ If implicit, how can infer?
Consent Qs Flowchart (no)
Consent? ➡️ possible to obtain in timeline needed? ➡️ reason to believe they would object?
Self defense for Courvoisier required …
Justification for action, mistake, whether mistake was reasonable under the circumstances
Elements of liability to third person from self defense: 1
Act that protects actor from harmful or offensive contact or other invasion of interests of personality
Elements of liability to third person from self defense: 2
Subjects him to liability from harm to third person for any harm unintentionally done to him only if recklessness or negligence established
Liability to third person from self defense rule
Act protecting actor from harmful or offensive contact or any other invasion of his interests or personality that subjects actor to liability for any harm unintentionally done to third person only if recklessness or negligence is established
For self defense from force not threatening death or serious bodily harm, an actor may ..
Use reasonable force to defend from unprivileged harmful/offensive contact which he reasonably believes another is about to inflict internationally upon him
For self defense of a third person by force not threatening death or serious bodily harm element ONE
Can defend a third person under same conditions and by same means as those under which he is privileged to defend himself
For self defense of a third person by force not threatening death or serious bodily harm element TWO
If he correctly or reasonably believes that the third person has a self defense privilege AND it is necessary to protect them
For self defense of a third person by force not threatening death or serious bodily harm element
Can defend a third person under the same conditions and using the same means as if he were privileged to defend himself IF he correctly or reasonably believes third person has self defense privilege AND necessary to protect them
Self defense by force threatening deadly harm element 1
Actor can defend with deadly force when reasonable belief that other is about to inflict intentional contact or other bodily harm
Self defense by force threatening deadly harm element 2
Threat of death, serious bodily harm or ravishment can be safely prevented only by using this deadly force
Self defense by force threatening deadly harm element 3
Not allowed if you believe you can avoid by retreating OR relinquishing a right other than the privilege to protect one’s dwelling
Self defense by force threatening deadly harm elements
Actor can defend himself with deadly force when there is a reasonable belief that the other is about to inflict intestinal contact or other bodily harm AND threat of death, serious bodily injury or ravishment can be prevented only by using deadly force AND not able to retreat or relinquish a right other than the one to protect one’s own dwelling
Self defense privilege requires —- force
Proportional
——- sometimes excuses trespass
Necessity (from man made or natural scenarios)
For necessity, you don’t have the — only to -
Duty to help, just duty not to untie/prevent use of property
Necessity elements
Can enter or remain on someone’s land if reasonably appears necessary to prevent serious harm to the actor or his land and chattels
For necessity, the probable —
advantage to P just be weighed against probable detriment to D
When would Ploof D have had better case for untyin
If P had communicable disease, armed pirates, posed some threat to him
Necessity privilege is not — and can —
Absolute, still be liable for damages to property you caused by use or remaining
What is policy behind qualified necessity privilege
Reason for owners to respect necessity, more harm to everyone if P and D fight it out themselves at time
Spring gun case, owner was liable because ..
Gave no notice, set trap to injure and catch not defend, also disproportionate force
Notice can be —
A request to stop
Element for defense of possessions from non lethal force ONE
Can use reasonable force if intrusion is not privileged OR other intentionally or negligently causes the actor to believe it is not privileged
Element for defense of possessions from non lethal force TWO
force used to prevent was only way to prevent
Element for defense of possessions from non lethal force THREE
First asked to stop and ignored OR reasonably believes request will be futile OR substantial harm will be done before request is made
Element for defense of possessions from non lethal force
Can use reasonable force if intrusion is not privileged or other intentionally or negligently causes actor to believe not privileged AND force used was only way to prevent it AND first asked to stop and ignored or if reasonably believe request would be futile or substantial damage will be done before request can be made
Defense of possession by force threatening death
Can only use lethal force if reasonable belief that the intruder unless expelled or excluded is likely to cause death or serious harm to the actor or a third person whom the actor is privileged to protect
Recapture chattel rule (Gortarez)
Owner whose property has been wrongfully taken while in fresh pursuit can use reasonable force to recapture a chattel
An owner using force to recapture a chattel must —
Be correct or liability flows from any mistake no matter how reasonable
The force that an owner uses to recapture a chattel must
Be reasonable and cannot inflict death or serious bodily harm
Arizona merchant state statute
Merchant may detain someone if reasonable cause, reasonable matter of detainment and for reasonable time
