Memory Flashcards
Transferred Intent
5 traditional, but can argue for more!?
False Imprisonment
- Act
- Intent to confine another within fixed boundaries
- Unlawful confinement or restraint
- Victim is conscious of confinement or harmed by it
Malicious Prosecution
–Criminal Or civil litigation, by D vs P from original suit
–Termination of process in favor of original P
**NB: dropped charges do not count
–There is malice:
1-Improper purpose (R2D)
2-Wanton disregard of facts or the law
3-showing ill will
–No probable Cause
–Damages to plaintiff
Abuse of Process
Use of legal process civil/criminal -within litigation -usually for interim procedures against another person -to accomplish a purpose for which it was not designed
Intentional Interference with Contractual and Economic Relations /Business Advantage
- Valid contractual relationship or business expectation
- knowledge
- Improper and intentional interference
- Causing breach
- Resultant damage
Improper - Factors:
- Nature of conduct
- Motive
- Interest interfered with
- Interests advanced by interferer
- Social interest (freedom of action of interferor, contractual interest of other party)
- Proximity
- Relations between parties
Intentional Misrepresentation
(1) false representation in reference to a material fact
(2) made with knowledge/reckless disregard of its falsity
(3) and with the intent to deceive / induce reliance
(4) with justifiable action taken in reliance upon the representation
(5) resulting in pecuniary harm
Misrepresentation resulting in physical harm is a separate tort: §310.
IIED
- Outrageous and extreme conduct
- Intent/Recklessness
- Causation
- Serious emotional harm
Think about NIED too
Defenses to Intentional Torts
- Self Defense
- Defense of Others
- Consent
- Necessity
Self Defense
- Use of reasonable force
- Defendant reasonably believed
- Necessary
- To prevent immediate harm
Some jx. Reasonable Mistake
Consent
- Autonomous adult has the right to waive their interest
- Express: objective manifestation
- Implied: custom, conduct
- Note: was consent induced by duress or material fraud?
- Children, mentally incapacitated, or someone coerced cannot consent!
Necessity
- Reasonable belief of imminent danger to greater interest
- Do minimal harm to protected interests
- Liable for damages if he intentionally uses another’s property for his own property’s benefit and he damages that property
Manufacturing Defect
Strict liability - compare to intended design
OR Res Ipsa
Res Ipsa
Res Ipsa Krebs:
- Cause known
- Instrumentality under exclusive control
- Instrumentality unlikely to cause the harm w/o neg on part of controller
Res Ipsa Modern:
- -Evidence supports inference someone was neg.
- -evidence supports inference it was D that was neg
Design
Standard:
- Negligence like approach’
2 tests
- Consumer expectations (ordinary customer would use product)
- risk utility tests (show better design)
Risk utility factors:Factors to consider
Gravity of danger posed by challenged design
Likelihood that danger will occur
Mechanical feasibility of a safer design
Financial cost of different design
Adverse consequences to the product and the consumer that would result from alternative design
Warning
Standard:
Negligence-like approach - reasonable warning
Important questions:
- Was there a warning at all (and should there have been?)
- If warning was content clear/sufficient?
- Format: Size? Placement?