Nuisance & Other Torts

Question 1

NUISANCE

(a type of harm, rather than a separate tort)

There are two kinds

Answer 1

1. Private nuisance when there is a substantial unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of plaintiff’s property. Ignore pltf’s hypersensitivity or specialized use of his propety. It must be “unreasonable” (offensive/annoying) to an average person.
2. Public nuisance When an act unreasonably interferes with the health, safety, or morals of a community. In order to sue, plaintiff must suffer unique damages. - one must have suffered a unique harm i.e. no simply setting in traffic but that accident involving the pltf occurred because of the display.

Question 2

NUISANCE

Def’s State of Mind

Distinction from Trespasss

Answer 2

1. Defendant’s state of mind doesn’t matter. Defendant could be doing something intentionally or not and it makes no difference in a nuisance action.

Distinction of Trespass

• Defendant is not crossing the boundary line into pltf’s land.
• Def is doing something on his own property that interferes w/pltf’s use of enjoyment of his land (rather than his exclusive possession).

Question 3

OTHER TORTS

(less heavily tested)

Answer 3

1. Intentional interference with Business Records
2. Misrepresentation

Question 4

INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE W/BUSINESS RELATIONS

Answer 4

Elements

1. There is a valid business relationship or business expectancy existed between the parties.
2. the defendant knew of this relationship or expectancy
3. the defendant intentionally coerced one of the parties to terminate the business relationship, breach a contract, or withhold a business expectancy
4. The defendant was not authorized to interfere with the parties’ dealing; and
5. The defendant’s interference resulted in damages to the plaintiff.

Question 5

INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE W/BUSINESS RELATIONS

Remedy to Plaintiff

Answer 5

1. Economic losses
2. Punitive damages if the defendant acted maliciously; and/or
3. an injunction

Question 6

MISREPRESENTATION

Answer 6

Elements

1. There is a material misrepresentation by defendant - this can be through words or conduct. Generally, non disclosure of a material fact is not enough unless there is a fiduciary relationship. “Puffing” is not considered to be a misrepresentation.
2. Scienter defendant knew his statement was false or said it with reckless indifference to the truth.
3. Intent to induce reliance on the misrepresentation.
4. Justifiable reliance by the plaintiff; and
5. Pecuniary damage to the plaintiff