Loss of Consortium and Tortious Interferenes with fam relations

Question 1

between spouses - loss of consortium

Answer 1

either spouse may bring an action for indirect interference with consortium and services caused by ds intentional or negligent tortious action against either spouse

Question 2

parent child loss of consortium

Answer 2

parent may maintain an action for loss of a childs services and consortirum whether ds conduct was intentional or negligent - child has no action against one who tortiously injures parent

Question 3

survival of tort actions

Answer 3

survival acts allow ones cause of action to survive the death of one or more of the parties - applies to torts involving property or torts resulting in personal injury (defamation invasion to right of privacy and malicious prosecution expire upon victims death)

Question 4

wrongful death

Answer 4

grants recovery for pecuniary injury resulting to spouse and next of kin - decedents creditors have no claim against amount awarded
-recovery is allowed only to the extent that the deceased could have recoverd in an action had they lived (so can be limited by contributory negligence,)

Question 5

intra family tort immunities

Answer 5

today most states have abolished spousal immunity but some states retain parent child immunity and dont apply it in 1) cases alleging intentional tort or 2) auto accident cases to the extent of insurance coverage

Question 6

gov tort immunity

Answer 6

feds - has waived immunity for tortious acts, but hasnt waived for a set of acts (assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libena nd slander, misrep and deceit, interference with k) and also immunity is not waived for discretionary acts or ministerial acts
state gov - have substantially waived to same extent as feds
local govs - public duty rule says that a duty owed to public at large is not owed to any particular citizen absent a special reltionship btween gov and citizen
Where municipal
immunity still exists, contrast “governmental” functions (functions that
could only be performed adequately by the government) and “proprietary” functions (functions that might as well have been provided by
a private corporation). Courts limit application of sovereign immunity
by not granting it for proprietary functions
for public officials - immune for discretionary acts done without malice or improper purpose but yes for ministerial acts
-charitableimmunity has mostly been abolished