Other Torts Kaplan Foundation Course MBE Questions Flashcards
Transporting a large quantity of highly flammable chemicals is an abnormally dangerous activity.
Consequently, some transporting products that are considered abnormally dangerous is subject to strict liability based upon Restatement section 519, which states: “One who carries on an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to (strict) liability for harm to the person, land or chattels of another resulting from the activity, although he has exercised the utmost care to prevent the harm.”
Strict liability for wild animals foreseeability extends to
According to Restatement of Torts, 2d, Section 507, “A possessor of a wild animal is subject to (strict) liability to another for harm done by the animal to the other, his person, land or chattels, although the possessor has exercised the utmost care to confine the animal, otherwise to prevent it from doing harm.”
Question involves strict products liability for a product that is “defective” and “unreasonably dangerous”–the required elements for strict products liability when
If such an accident was foreseeable and the manufacturer and it failed to warn purchasers of the danger then the manufacturer is strictly liable
As a general rule, the only defense in strict liability is assumption of risk, not contributory negligence, explain the difference
Always remember the main difference between assumption of risk and contributory negligence is that assumption of risk is a subjective standard. The plaintiff must subjectively be aware of the danger and knowingly expose himself to the danger. On the other hand, contributory negligence is an objective standard where the plaintiff’s conduct falls below the applicable standard of care necessary for his own protection.
Most Multistate questions will test a fine line distinction or nuance. In the area of Torts, it is imperative to distinguish between strict liability and negligence actions.
Strict liability claims must include necessary that the auction company be engaged in the business of selling automobiles to be held strictly liable. Negligence claims include the failure to inspect
There are five elements required to establish a claim for misrepresentation
1) there must be a material misrepresentation, 2) the defendant must act with scienter, 3) the defendant must intend to induce reliance, 4) the plaintiff must justifiably rely on the misrepresentation, and 5) the plaintiff must suffer pecuniary damages.
The key to this question is understanding the element of scienter. This element is satisfied in two situations: 1) when the defendant lies, or 2) when the defendant makes a statement of fact not knowing whether it is true or false.
An action brought for nuisance will not be recoverable when
Prosser states, “The plaintiff cannot, by devoting his own land to an unusually sensitive use,” recover for nuisance. Law of Torts,
to prove an action for defamation, the teacher will have to show that:
1) A false, defamatory statement of fact was made; 2) Reasonably understood as relating to the teacher; 3) Intentionally or negligently published to a third party; 4) Causing her damage; 5) Made with the requisite degree of fault as to the truth or falsity of the statement. Under Gertz v. Welch [418 U.S. 323 (1974)],
A private person suing a media defendant for defamation must show that the defendant was at least negligent with regard to the truth or falsity of the printed statement, where the statement involves a matter of public concern
Recovery under Slander Per Se
Sections 571-574 of the Restatement 2d, Torts provides that “an action for slander will lie without proof of special harm only where (1) the words impute a criminal offense which, if committed in the place of publication (a) would be punishable by death or imprisonment, or (b) regarded by public opinion as involving moral turpitude; (2) the words impute to the plaintiff a presently existing venereal or other loathsome and communicable disease; (3) the words impute to the plaintiff conduct, characteristics, or a condition incompatible with the proper conduct of his lawful business, trade, profession, or with his public or private office, whether honorary or for profit; and (4) the words impute to a woman unchastity.
Slander per se, wherein the plaintiff can recover damages without proving that he has suffered any special harm at all. The cause of action is complete when the plaintiff proves that such a type of slander has been published about him and that he has suffered “actual injury” as a result of the defamatory statement. It is important for students to note the four per se categories for either slander or libel.
Defamation claim requires
It is important to remember that the defamatory meaning of a statement must be communicated. Thus, the utterance must be understood by the third person. Accordingly, Prosser notes that “words spoken in a foreign tongue are not actionable unless they are heard by one who understands the language.
Remember that invasion of right of privacy is not a single tort but comprises the following four distinct causes of action: 1) appropriation, 2) false light, 3) public disclosure of private facts, and 4) intrusions on one’s seclusion and solitude. In order to recover for public disclosure, the facts disclosed must be private facts, not public ones.
Remember that invasion of right of privacy is not a single tort but comprises the following four distinct causes of action: 1) appropriation, 2) false light, 3) public disclosure of private facts, and 4) intrusions on one’s seclusion and solitude. In order to recover for public disclosure, the facts disclosed must be private facts, not public ones.
Define “Appropriation”
Appropriation is defined as the unauthorized use by defendant of plaintiff’s picture or name for defendant’s commercial advantage.
