Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Torts > Intentional Torts > Flashcards

Intentional Torts Flashcards

1
Q

7 Intentional Torts

A

Battery

Assault

False Imprisonment

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Trespass to land

Trespass to channels

Conversion

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

Act requirement of intentional torts

A

The act required is a volitional movement by defendant.

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

Steps to analyze a tort question

A

Determine torts tested

Can plaintiff establish a prima facie case

  If no , stop
  If yes, continue

Can defendant establish any affirmative defenses

General considerations (vicarious liability, multiple defendant issues, and tort immunities)

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

Intent requirement of intentional tort

A

Intent may be either (1) specific (the goal in acting is to bring about specific consequences) or (2) general (the actor knows with substantial certainty that these consequences will result).

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

General rule for transferred intent

A

Transferred intent doctrine applies when the defendant intends to commit a tort against one person but instead (1) commits a different tort against that person, (2) commits the same tort as intended but against a different person, or (3) commits a different tort against a different person.

In these cases, the intent to commit a certain tort against one person is transferred to the tort actually committed or to the person actually injured for purposes of establishing a prima facie case.

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

Limitations on use of transferred intent

A

Transferred intent may be invoked only if both the tort intended and the tort that results are one of the following:

A) assault;

B) battery;

C) False imprisonment;

D) trespass to land; or

E) trespass to chattels

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

Incapacity as a defense to the intentional torts

A

Incapacity is not a good defense.

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

Causation element of intentional torts

A

Causation is satisfied if defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury.

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

Prima facie case to battery

A

(1) harmful or offensive contact;
(2) to plaintiff’s person;
(3) intent; and
(4) causation

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

Supersensitive plaintiff fact pattern

A

Plaintiff’s super sensitivities are irrelevant

Unless, defendant, in fact, knew of them

Treat plaintiff as an average reasonable person (subject to the exception)

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

Harmful or offensive contact of battery

A

Harmfulness and offensiveness are judged by a reasonable person standard.

Contact can be direct (i.e, striking plaintiff) or indirect ( i.e, setting a trap for plaintiff to fall into)

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

Damages in battery actions

A

Plaintiff can recover nominal damages even if actual damages are not proved.

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

Prima facie case of assault

A

(1) an act by defendant creating a reasonable apprehension in plaintiff;
(2) of immediate harmful or offensive contact to plaintiff’s person;
(3) intent; and
(4) causation

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

Distinguishing fear from apprehension

A

Apprehension should not be confused with fear or intimidation (i.e., a weakling can cause apprehension and thus assault a bully).

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

Apparent ability sufficient for assault

A

If defendant has the apparent ability to commit a battery, this will be enough to cause a reasonable apprehension.

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

Words as apprehension

A

Words alone are not sufficient to create reasonable apprehension.

Words coupled with conduct however can create reasonable apprehension.

Words can also negate reasonable apprehension (i.e., the defendant shakes her face but states that she’s not going to strike the plaintiff)

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

Requirement of immediacy for assault

A

Plaintiff must be apprehensive that she is about to become the victim of an immediate battery

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

Damages in assault cases

A

Plaintiff can recover nominal damages even if actual damages are not proved

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

Prima facie case of false imprisonment

A

(1) an action or omission on the part of defendant that confines or restrains plaintiff;
(2) to a bounded area;
(3) intent; and
(4) causation

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

Sufficient methods of confinement or restraint

A

Sufficient acts of restraint include; (1) physical barriers, (2) physical force, (3) threats of force, (4) failure to release, and (5) invalid use of legal authority

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

Insufficient methods of confinement or restraint

A

Insufficient acts of restraint include: (1) moral pressure and (2) future threats

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

Time of confinement

A

It is irrelevant how short the period of confinement is.

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

Awareness of confinement

A

Plaintiff must know of the confinement or be harmed by it.

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

What is a bounded area

A

For an area to be bounded freedom of movement must be limited in all directions.

There must be no reasonable means of escape known to plaintiff.

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

Damages in false imprisonment cases

A

Plaintiff can recover nominal damages even if actual damages are not proved

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

Prima facie case of intentional infliction of emotional distress

A

(1) an act by defendant amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct;
(2) intent or recklessness;
(3) causation; and
(4) damages-severe emotional distress

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

What is extreme and outrageous conduct

A

Conduct that transcends all bounds of decency

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

When conduct that is not normally outrageous may become so

A

(1) it is continuous in nature;
2) it is directed toward a certain type of plaintiff (children, elderly persons, pregnant women, supersensitive adult if the sensitivities are known to defendant); or
3) is committed by certain type of defendant (common carriers or innkeepers may be liable even for mere gross insults)

29
Q

Requisite intent for IIED

A

Unlike other intentional torts, recklessness as to the effect of defendant’s conduct will satisfy the intent requirement

30
Q

Damages for IIED

A

Actual damages (severe emotional distress), not nominal damages, are required.

Proof of physical injury is not required.

31
Q

Causation in IIED bystander cases

A

Plaintiff can establish a successful claim by either showing the prima facie case elements of emotional distress or that (1) she was present when the injury occurred, (2) she’s a close relative of the injured person, and (3) the defendant knew facts (1) and (2).

32
Q

Prima facie case of trespass to land

A

(1) physical invasion of plaintiff’s real property;
(2) intent; and
(3) causation

33
Q

Physical invasion requirement

A

The invasion maybe by a person or object.

If intangible matter enters, the plaintiff may have a case for nuisance.

34
Q

Plaintiff’s property

A

Real property includes not only the surface, but also airspace and subterranean space for a reasonable distance.

35
Q

Intent in trespass to land cases

A

Defendant need to intend only to enter onto that particular piece of land (he need not know that the land belong to another).

36
Q

Potential plaintiffs in trespass to land case

A

Anyone in actual or constructive possession of the land may maintain this action

37
Q

Damages in trespass to land cases

A

Plaintiff can recover without showing actual injury to the land

38
Q

Prima facie case of trespass to chattels

A

(1) an act by defendant that interferes with plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel;
(2) intent;
(3) causation; and
(4) damages

39
Q

Two types of interference in trespass to chattel

A

The interference may either be in intermingling (i.e., directly damaging the chattel) or a dispossession (i.e., depriving plaintiff of his lawful right of possession of the chattel)

40
Q

Damages in trespass to chattels

A

Actual damages-not necessarily to the chattel, but at least to possessory right-are required.

41
Q

Prima facie case of conversion

A

(1) an act by defendant that interferes with plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel;
(2) the interference is so serious that it warrants requiring defendant to pay the chattel’s full value;
(3) intent; and
(4) causation

42
Q

Acts of conversion

A

Acts of conversion include wrongful acquisition (theft), wrongful transfer, wrongful detention, and substantially changing, severely damaging, or misusing a chattel

43
Q

Seriousness of interference for conversion

A

The longer the withholding, and the more extensive the use, the more likely it is to be conversion.

44
Q

Property subject to conversion

A

Only tangible personal property and intangibles that have been reduced to physical form are subject to conversion

45
Q

Potential plaintiffs in conversion cases

A

Anyone with possession or the immediate right to possession of the chattel may maintain an action for conversion

46
Q

Remedies in a conversion case

A

Plaintiff may recover damages (fair market value at the time of conversion) or possession (replevin)

47
Q

Consent defense to intentional torts

A

Plaintiff’s consent to defendant’s conduct is a defense.

Any consent fact pattern raises two inquiries:

(1) was there a valid consent (i.e., no fraud)
(2) did the defendant stay within the boundaries of the consent

48
Q

General rule for Express actual consent

A

Defendant is not liable if plaintiff expressly consents to defendant’s conduct

49
Q

Exceptions to the general rule of express consent

A

(1) Mistake will undo consent if defendant knew of and took advantage of the mistake
(2) consent induced by fraud will be invalidated if it goes to essential matter, but not a collateral matter;
(3) consent obtained by duress will be invalidated unless the duress is only threats of future action or future economic deprivation (i.e. Coercion)

50
Q

Implied consent

A

Apparent consent is that which a reasonable person would infer from Custom and usage or plaintiff’s conduct i.e., contacts inherent in body contact sports, ordinary incidental contact, etc.

Consent implied by law arises when action is necessary to save a person’s life or some other important interest in person or property.

51
Q

Capacity requirement for consent

A

Individuals without capacity are deemed incapable of consent.

52
Q

Exceeding consent given

A

If defendant exceeds the scope of consent and does something substantially different, he may be liable

53
Q

Three questions to ask with the defense privileges

A

(1) is a privilege available? These privileges apply only for preventing the commission of a tort. Already committed torts do not qualify.
(2) is a mistake permissible as to whether the tort being defended against is actually being committed?
(3) was a proper amount of force used?

54
Q

Privilege of self-defense

A

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.

55
Q

When is the self-defense available

A

1) one need not attempt to escape, but the modern trend imposes a duty to retreat before using deadly force if this can be done safely, unless the actor is in her home.
2) self-defense is generally not available to the initial aggressor
3) self-defense may extend to third-party injuries (caused while the actor was defending herself). An actor might be liable to a third person if she deliberately injured him in trying to protect herself.

56
Q

Is mistake allowed in self-defense

A

A reasonable mistake as to the existence of the danger is allowed

57
Q

How much force may be used in self-defense

A

One may use only that force that reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the harm (including deadly force).

58
Q

When is the defense of others defense available

A

One may use force to defend another when the actor reasonably believes that the other person could have used force to defend himself

59
Q

Is mistake allowed in defense of others

A

A reasonable mistake as to whether the other person is being attacked or has a right to defend himself is permitted

60
Q

How much force may be used in defense of others

A

The defender may use as much force as he could have used in self-defense if he were the one threatened with the injury

61
Q

When is the defense of property privilege available

A

One may use reasonable force to prevent the commission of a tort against her real or personal property.

A request to desist or leave must first be made unless they clearly would be futile or dangerous.

One may use force in hot pursuit of another who has tortiously dispossessed the owner of chattels because the tort is viewed as still being committed

62
Q

Is mistake allowed in defense of property cases

A

A reasonable mistake is allowed as to whether an intrusion has occurred or whether a request to desist is required.

A mistake is not allowed as to whether the entrant has a privilege that supersedes the defense of property right, unless the entrant conducts the entry so as to leave the defendant to reasonably believe it is not privileged

63
Q

Defense of property against one with a privilege

A

Whenever an actor has a privilege to enter onto the land of another because of necessity, recapture of chattels, etc., that privilege will supersede the privilege of the land possessor to defend her property.

64
Q

How much force may be used to defend property

A

Reasonable force may be used. However, one may not use force causing death or serious bodily harm unless the invasion of property also entails a serious threat of bodily harm.

65
Q

Recapture of chattels

A

When another’s possession began lawfully, one may use only peaceful means to recover the channel. Force may be used to recapture a chattel only in hot pursuit of one who obtained possession wrongfully.

66
Q

When is recapture of chattels available

A

1) There must be a timely demand to return the chattels first unless clearly futile or dangerous.
2) recapture may be only from a tortfeasor or some third person who knows or should know that the chattels were tortious late obtained.
3) when chattels are located on the land of the wrongdoer, the owner is privileged to enter onto the land and reclaim them at a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, after first making a demand for their return. When the chattels on the land of an innocent party, the owner may enter and reclaim her chattel at a reasonable time and in a peaceful manner when the landowner has been given notice of the presence of the chattel and refuses to return it. However the chattel owner will be liable for any actual damage caused by the entry. If the chattels are on the land of another through the owner’s fault there is no privilege to enter onto that land.

67
Q

Is mistake allowed in recapture of chattels

A

No mistake regarding defendant’s right to recapture the chattels or enter onto the land is allowed. However, shopkeepers may have a privilege to detain for a reasonable period of time individuals whom they reasonably believe to be in possession of shoplifted goods.

68
Q

How much force may be used to recapture chattels

A

Reasonable force, not including force sufficient to cause death or serious bodily harm, may be use to recapture chattels.

69
Q

Necessity defense

A

A person may interfere with the real or personal property of another when it is reasonably and apparently necessary to avoid threatened injury from a natural or other force and when the threatening injury is substantially more serious than the invasion that is undertaken to avert it.

There are two types of necessity; (1) public-when the act is for public good; and (2) private-when the act is solely to benefit a limited number of people. Under private necessity the actor must pay for any injury he causes.

Necessity is a defense only to property torts.

Torts (8 decks)

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