Other Torts

Question 1

NUISANCE: two types

Answer 1

two types- private v. public

Question 2

private nuisance:

Answer 2

UNREAS interference with the use and enjoyment of another’s property;
unreasonable interference must be unreasonable to a reasonable person (objective standard)
(heavy metal example); so things like sensitivity is not going to give rise to a private nuisance bc
this is not going to interfere with a normal person (usually between neighbors or individuals)

Question 3

public nuisance:

Answer 3

unreas interference with a right shared by a public at large; this is affecting a public at large; so it might be a company, nuclear chemical factory.

Question 4

normally who brings the suit on behalf of the public at large?

Answer 4

a govt official, a general atty.

Question 5

hypo

what if a private plaintiff brings a public nuisance suit against that company?

Answer 5

then you have to prove special damages. usually economic/pecuniary harm

Question 6

Defamation – step 1

Answer 6

Step 1: make sure you know the statement in q was defamatory
a defamatory statement is (a) a false (negative) statement, (b) of or about the P (c) with
publication (heard and understood at least by a third party) that (d) causes damage (economic
damages; doesn’t have to be, it could even hurt reputation).

Question 7

Defamation – step 2

Answer 7

Step 2: what type of statement was it?
3 types:
1) libel – written down; no special damages (pecuniary) are required to be proven; didn’t have to
lose $
2) slander – spoken; you say something that everyone can understand; MUST have special harm
($ lost); special damages required
3) slander per se – 4 kinds of statements that are so terrible to someone’s reputation that the
damages are presumed: they are – 1) statement about your pfoession or business; 2) chastity of a
woman; 3) crime of moral turpitude (look for any felony – serious crime); 4) a loathsome disease
(you accuse someone of having an STD and it’s false – damages are presumed) ——————–
no damages need to be proven

Question 8

Sometimes fact pattern is testing who is being defamed – what’s the issue?

Answer 8

now we get into a public figure versus a

private figure:

Question 9

Defaming public figure

Answer 9

someone who throws themselves into the public – malice is the standard
– you have to have acted recklessly (malice = RECKLESS); you knew or should have known what
you said was false.

Question 10

Defaming private figure

Answer 10

standard needed to prove is NEGLIGENCE– you shoulda checked

something and didn’t do so;

Question 11

Defenses to Defamation

Answer 11

truth is an absolute defense
Other defenses are
privilege – public/govt proceeding has an absolute privilege

Question 12

highly tested is qualified privilege

Answer 12

you are saying something about a matter that appears
necessary to protect the D’s interest or public’s interest. what does it look like? it’s when you
rquest me to say something about you? A reccomendation/character reference from a boss that
hurts you. Nope, as long as I said something honestly which I reasonably believed was true, I am
protected.

Question 13

INVASION OF PRIVACY – 4 ways

Answer 13

False light
Appropriation
Public disclosure of a private matter
Intrusion upon seclusion

Question 14

False Light

Answer 14

you portray someone in false light; portraying someone in a way they are not
actually like (false light = not true);

Question 15

appropriation

Answer 15

unauthorized use
of the P’s name or likeness
for commercial advantage.

Question 16

Public disclosure of a private matter

Answer 16

taking someone’s private matter and disclosing it to the
public (meaning, there’s an expectation of privacy); if you yourself put your private matters into the
public, just because someone else is going to put it out there, then they are not disclosing anything
because you have no expectation of privacy. If it’s also newsworthy, then you’re not publicly
disclosing anymore.

Question 17

Intrusion upon seclusion

Answer 17

invading your privacy in a literal place; going through your garbage
etc.

Question 18

Misrepresentation – 2 types

Answer 18

intentional and negligent

*sometimes they’ll also use words like fraud and deceit

Question 19

Intentional Misrep

Answer 19

D misrepresent intentionally
a material fact that they
knew or should have known
could be false, with intent
to induce reliance;
you do rely and it causes you damages (usually money)

Question 20

Neg. Misrep

Answer 20

there was negligent conduct
of a false or misleading statement
to someone that I have a special
relationship with and you relied
on my negligence which caused you
damage. (house example about broken roof; think fiduciary relationship)

Question 21

Tortious Interference with A Contractual Relationship:

Answer 21

A contract exists with a D’s **knowledge and
D intentionally induces one party to breach
causing damage.
–this happens all the time with agents in sports; a competing agent knows there’s a contract, so
he does something to induce athlete to breach like bribing them to breach them – so the other
agent loses money

Question 22

Malicious Prosecution

Answer 22

starting a criminal proceeding without a probable cause for some other reason than bringing
justice; filing charges for some other reason, like getting revenge