Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Torts > Part One: Intentional Torts > Flashcards

Part One: Intentional Torts Flashcards

1
Q

In General, what is the prima facie case for an “intentional tort”?

A
  1. Act by Defendant;
  2. Intent (general or specific);
  3. Causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the 7 relevant intentional torts?

A

INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSON

  1. Assault
  2. Battery
  3. False Imprisonment
  4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PROPERTY

  1. Trespass to Land
  2. Trespass to Chattels
  3. Conversion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

For the purpose of establishing an “intentional tort,” what constitutes an “act by defendant”?

A

The act required is a “volitional movement” by the defendant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

For the purpose of establishing an “intentional tort” what constitutes “intent”?

A

“Intent” may be “specific” or “general”

“Specific intent” = purpose in acting is to bring about specific consequence

“General intent” = actor knows with “substantial certainty” that the consequence will result.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

In order to establish “intent” in establishing an “intentional tort,” is it necessary for D to intend the injury?

A

No.

Example –> If D intentionally pushes P, who falls and breaks arm, D is liable for breaking arm even if they didn’t intend to.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

With regards to “intentional torts” what is the “Doctrine of Transferred Intent”?

A

Intent gets transferred from one tort to another if:

  1. different tort against same person;
  2. same tort against different person;
  3. different tort against different person.

But See…limitations on use of transferred intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the limitations on the use of transferred intent?

A

It can ONLY apply if BOTH torts are on this list:

  1. Battery
  2. Assault
  3. False Imprisonment
  4. Trespass to Land
  5. Trespass to Chattels
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

In an “intentional tort” is capacity a good defense against the existence of “intent”?

A

No.

Everyone is capable of intent. Incapacity is not a good defense.

Example –> young children and persons who are mentally incompetent will be liable for their intentional torts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

For the purpose of establishing an “intentional tort,” what constitutes “causation”?

A

The result must have been legally caused by D’s act or something set in motion by him.

Causation = satisfied if D’s conduct was a “SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR” in bringing about the injury

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the 4 intentional torts agains the person?

A
  1. Battery
  2. Assault
  3. False Imprisonment
  4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is the prime facie case for “BATTERY”?

A

Four elements of prime facie case for BATTERY:

  1. Harmful or offensive contact;
  2. to P’s person;
  3. Intent; and
  4. Causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is “harmful or offensive contact” for the purpose of establishing “Battery”?

A

“Harmful contact” = causes actual injury, pain, or disfigurement

“offensive contact” = if it would one considered offensive to the reasonable person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the effect of “consent” on the element of “harmful or offensive contact”?

A

Contact = offensive only if it is not consented to.

Consent = implied for ordinary contacts of everyday life (ie..someone bumps you on a crowded bus).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

For the purpose of establishing “harmful or offensive contact” for “battery,” does “contact” need to be direct?

A

No.

Contact may be direct or indirect

Example:

  • striking P (direct)
  • planting trap for P to fall into (indirect)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is considered the “plaintiff’s person” for the purpose of establishing “battery” ?

A

Includes anything connected to the Plaintiff (ie..clothing or purse)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

For the purpose of establishing “battery” are damages required?

A

No. Plaintiff can recover “nominal damages” even if actual damages are not proven.

Plaintiff may recover “punitive damages” for malicious misconduct.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is the prime facie case for “ASSAULT”?

A

Four elements to establish prime facie case of assault:

  1. Act by D creating “REASONABLE APPREHENSION” in P;
  2. of “IMMEDIATE HARMFUL OR OFFENSIVE CONTACT” to P’s Person;
  3. Intent; and
  4. Causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

With regards to establishing the prima facie case for “ASSAULT” what is the issue regarding “APPREHENSION”?

A
  • Apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact must be REASONABLE.
  • Courts will not protect P against exaggerated fears of contact.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

With regards to the prima facie case for “ASSAULT” does “apprehension” mean “fear” or “intimidation”?

A

No.

Apprehension should not be confused with FEAR or INTIMIDATION.

For example –> a weakling can cause giant bully to apprehend offensive contact.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

With regards to the prima facie case for “ASSAULT”, can “APPREHENSION” be established if P has no knowledge of the act?

A

No.

For apprehension to be show, P must have been aware of the threat (although they need not know of D’s identity).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

With regards to the prima facie case for “ASSAULT”, can “APPREHENSION” be established if D only has the “apparent ability” to commit a battery?

A

YES.

If D has the APPARENT ABILITY to commit a battery, this is enough to create a “REASONABLE APPREHENSION”, even if they don’t have the actual ability.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

With regards to the prime facie case for “ASSAULT”, what is the effect of words with regards to creating “reasonable apprehension”?

A
  • Words alone are NOT sufficient to create reasonable apprehension. They must be coupled with conduct.
  • HOWEVER –> words MAY negate reasonableness of apprehension. (Example –> someone is shaking their fist, but says they won’t hit).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

With regards to the prima facie case for “assault”, what is the “immediacy requirement”?

A

P must be apprehensive that she is about to become the victim of an IMMEDIATE battery.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Are actual damages required to establish the prima facie case for “ASSAULT”?

A

No.

P can recover “nominal damages” even if actual damages cannot be shown.

P can recover “punitive damages” if there is malicious misconduct.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What are the elements of the prima facie case for “False Imprisonment”?

A

The elements to establish the prima facie case for false imprisonment are:

  1. An act or omission by D that “confines or restrains” plaintiff to a “bounded area”;
  2. Intent; and
  3. causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What are sufficient methods of “confinement or restraint” in order to establish “False Imprisonment”?

A

Sufficient methods of “confinement or restraint” are:

  1. physical barriers;
  2. physical force directed against P, immediate family, or personal property (ie… taking p’s purse);
  3. direct, indirect or implied threats of force;
  4. failure to release P despite legal duty to do so (ie..taxi driver won’t release passenger)
  5. invalid use of legal authority.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What are insufficient methods of “confinement or restraint” in order to establish “False Imprisonment”?

A

Insufficient methods of “confinement or restraint are”:

  1. moral pressure;
  2. future threats
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

To establish “False Imprisonment”, what is the relevance of the length of confinement?

A

It is irrelevant. Any amount of time is sufficient, no matter how short.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

With regards to “False Imprisonment”, what is the rule regarding P’s awareness of the confinement?

A

P must be either:

  1. Aware of the confinement; OR
  2. harmed by it.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

To establish “False Imprisonment”, what qualifies as a “bounded area” ?

A
  • For an area to be “bounded,” freedom of movement must be limited in all directions.
  • There must be no REASONABLE means of escape KNOWN to Plaintiff
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Are actual damages required to make a prima facie case for “False Imprisonment”?

A

No.

P may get “nominal damages” even in the absence of actual damages.

P may get punitive damages if D acted maliciously.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is the prima facie case to establish “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” (IIED) ?

A
  1. Act by D amounting to “EXTREME and OUTRAGEOUS” conduct;
  2. Intent or recklessness;
  3. Causation;
  4. Damages - SEVERE emotional distress
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

With regards to establishing “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress”, what is “EXTREME and OUTRAGEOUS Conduct”?

A

“Extreme and outrageous conduct” - must transcend all bounds of decency.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What is the special rule re: “intent” with regards to establishing a case for “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” ?

A

Unlike other intentional torts, RECKLESSNESS as to the effect of D’s conduct will satisfy the intent requirement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What is the special rule re: “damages” with regards to establishing a case for “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” ?

A
  • Actual damages (SEVERE EMOTIONAL DISTRESS) are required.
  • Proof of physical injury is NOT required.
  • The more outrageous the conduct, the less proof of damages is required.

NOTE: IIED is the ONLY intentional tort to the PERSON that requires damages.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What is the special rule regarding “causation” in Bystander cases?

A

When D intentionally causes PHYSICAL HARM to a 3rd party, and P suffers severe emotional distress because of it, P may recover by showing EITHER:

  1. the prima facie case; OR
  2. that:
    (i) she was present when the injury occurred,
    (ii) she is a close relative of the injured person; and
    (iii) D knew facts one and two.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

In establishing the prima facie case for “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress,” under what circumstances can conduct that is not “outrageous” be considered “outrageous”?

A

Conduct that is not normally outrageous may become so if:

  1. It is continuous in nature; OR
  2. It is directed towards a certain type of Plaintiff (children, elderly, pregnant women, super-sensitive adults if the sensitivity is known to D); OR
  3. it is committed by a certain type of D (common carriers or innkeepers may be liable even for mere “gross insults”)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

What are the three intentional torts against property?

A
  1. Trespass to Land
  2. Trespass to Chattels
  3. Conversion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What is the prima facie case for “Trespass to Land”?

A
  1. Physical invasion of P’s real property;
  2. Intent;
  3. Causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

With regards to establishing “Trespass to Land,” what constitutes a “physical invasion” ?

A
  • The invasion may be by a person or object, but it must be tangible

Example –> baseball thrown onto P’s property can be a trespass

-NOTE: if it’s intangible (for example, odor or vibration), then the P may have an action for nuisance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

With regards to establishing “Trespass to Land,” what counts as “real property”?

A
  • The surface of real property

- Airspace and subterranean space for a reasonable distance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

With regards to establishing “Trespass to Land,” what is the requisite “intent” required?

A

D must have intent only to enter onto the land. He need not know the land belonged to another.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Who may assert a claim for “Trespass to Land”?

A

Anyone in “actual” or “constructive” possession of the land may assert a claim of trespass to land.

44
Q

In order to establish a claim for “Trespass to Land,” are damages required?

A

No.

Plaintiff can recover WITHOUT showing actual injury to the land.

45
Q

What is the prima facie case for “Trespass to Chattels”?

A

The elements of a claim of Trespass to Chattels:

  1. Act by D that “interferes with P’s right of possession in a chattel”;
  2. Intent;
  3. Causation; AND
  4. Damages
46
Q

With regards to establishing a claim for “Trespass to Chattels,” - what are the TWO types of “interference with P’s right of possession to chattel”?

A
  1. “Intermeddling” - directly damaging chattel;

2. “dispossession” - depriving P of P’s lawful right to possess chattel

47
Q

With regards to establishing a claim for “Trespass to Chattel” - what satisfies the “intent” requirement?

A
  • Intent to commit trespass is NOT required.
  • The only intent needed is to commit the act of interference
  • Mistaken belief that chattel belongs to D is not a defense
48
Q

With regards to establishing a claim for “Trespass to Chattels” - are damages required?

A

Yes.

  • Actual damages are required.
  • The damages NEED NOT be actual harm to chattel, but at least damages to possessory interest
49
Q

What is the remedy if a “Trespass to Chattel” is established?

A

The remedy for “Trespass to Chattel” is recovery of:

  • actual damages from harm to chattel OR loss of use
  • if dispossession, damages based on rental value
50
Q

What are the elements of the prima facie case for “Conversion”?

A
  1. Act by D that “interferes with P’s right of possession in chattel”;
  2. Intent;
  3. Causation;
  4. Damages - an interference serious enough in nature or consequences to warrant that the D pay chattel’s full value
51
Q

What are some example acts of “conversion”?

A
  1. wrongful acquisition (theft);
  2. wrongful transfer;
  3. wrongful detention;
  4. substantially changing, severely damaging, or misusing chattel
52
Q

With regards to establishing a claim for “Conversion” - what satisfies the “intent” requirement?

A
  • As with “trespass to chattel,” the only intent required is the intent to do the act that interfere’s with P’s right of possession
  • mistake of ownership is not a defense
  • intent to convert is not necessary
53
Q

What is the rule regarding “seriousness of interference” and “conversion” versus “trespass to chattel”?

A
  • The longer the withholding period and the more serious the misuse, the more likely it is to be a conversion.
  • The shorter and less serious, the more likely it is to be a trespass to chattel
54
Q

What type of property can be subject to “conversion”?

A

Only “tangible personal property” and “intangible property reduce to physical form can be subject of conversion.

Example –> promissory note.

55
Q

Who is a potential plaintiff in a “Conversion”?

A

Anyone with possession OR immediate right to possession of chattel may maintain an action for conversion.

56
Q

What is the remedy for “Conversion”?

A

There are two possible remedies for conversion:

  1. DAMAGES - P may recover FMV at time of conversion); OR
  2. REPLEVIN - P may recover possession of chattel (Replevin).
57
Q

In general, what are the 5 defenses to intentional torts?

A
  1. Consent
  2. Self-defense, defense of others, defense of property
  3. Privilege of Arrest
  4. Necessity
  5. Discipline
58
Q

With regards to the defense of “Consent”, what are the two issues that a fact pattern raises?

A
  1. Was there a valid consent? (ie..no fraud)

2. Did D stay within the scope of consent? (ie..not bringing a gun to a fist fight)

59
Q

What is the general rule regarding the defense of “Consent” to an intentional tort?

A

D is not liable if P expressly or impliedly consents (apparent consent) to D’s conduct.

BUT SEE exceptions.

60
Q

Under what circumstances is express consent no good as a defense to an intentional tort?

A
  1. “MISTAKE” - mistake will undo express consent IF D KNEW OF and TOOK ADVANTAGE of mistake;
  2. “FRAUD” - consent induced by fraud will be invalidated if it goes to an essential matter, but not a collateral matter;
  3. “DURESS” - consent obtained by duress will be invalidated UNLESS the duress is only threats of future action or future economic deprivation.
61
Q

What is “apparent consent”?

A

“Apparent consent” is that which a reasonable person would infer from custom and usage or P’s conduct

Example ==> normal contacts inherent in sports, ordinary incidental contact

62
Q

What is “consent implied by law”?

A

“Consent Implied by Law” = arises when action is necessary to save a person’s life or some other important interest in person or property

63
Q

What is the rule regarding “capacity” and “consent” as a defense to an intentional tort.

A

Capacity is required for consent.

Individuals without capacity are deemed incapable of consent.

Examples –> incompetent people, very young children, drunks

64
Q

What is the rule regarding the “scope” of “consent”?

A

If D exceeds scope of consent and does something substantially different, he may be liable

65
Q

With regards to the defense of “Defense of Self, Others, Property,” what are the THREE issues that a fact pattern raises?

A
  1. Is the privilege available?
  2. Is mistake permissible as to whether the tort being defended against is actually being committed?
  3. Was the proper amount of force used?
66
Q

With regards to the “Defense of Self, Others, Property”- when is the privilege available?

A

This privilege is available ONLY to prevent the commission of a tort.

It is NOT available if the tort has already been committed.

67
Q

What is the rule regarding “Self-Defense” as a defense to intentional tort?

A

Rule: When a person “REASONABLY BELIEVES” that she is being OR is about to be attacked, she may use such force as is reasonably necessary to protect against injury.

68
Q

With regards to “Self-Defense” - is there a duty to retreat?

A

Majority rule –> No duty to retreat

Modern trend –> Imposes a duty to retreat before using DEADLY force if this can be done safely, UNLESS in your own home,

69
Q

Is “self-defense” available to the initial aggressor?

A

Self defense is NOT available to the initial aggressor, UNLESS the other party response to aggressor’s non-deadly force with deadly force.

70
Q

Does “self-defense” extend to 3rd party injuries?

A

Self-defense MAY extend to 3rd party injuries caused while actor was defending herself.

HOWEVER —> an actor MAY be liable for hurting 3rd party if they did so deliberately in trying to protect themselves.

71
Q

What is the rule regarding “self-defense” and “mistake”?

A

A “REASONABLE MISTAKE” as to the existence of the danger is allowed.

72
Q

With regards to “self-defense”, how much force can be used?

A

One may use only that force that reasonably appears necessary to prevent the harm (including deadly force).

If more force than is reasonably necessary is used, the defense is lost.

73
Q

What is the rule regarding “Defense of Others” as a defense to intentional tort?

A

One may use force to defend another when the actor “REASONABLY BELIEVES” that the other person could have used force to defend himself.

74
Q

What is the rule regarding “Defense of Others” and “mistake” ?

A

A “REASONABLE MISTAKE” as to whether the other person is being attacked OR has a right to defend himself is permitted

75
Q

With regards to “Defense of Others” - how much force may be used?

A

The defender may use as much force as he could have used in self-defense if he were the one threatened with injury.

76
Q

When is the defense of “Defense of Property” available?

A
  • One may use “REASONABLE FORCE” to prevent the commission of a tort against her REAL or PERSONAL property.
  • A request to desist or leave must first be made UNLESS it would clearly be FUTILE or DANGEROUS
  • Although defense does not apply once tort has been committed, one may use force in “HOT PURSUIT” of another who has tortiously dispossessed owner of chattel because the tort is still being viewed as continuing
77
Q

When is the defense of “Defense of Property” available?

A
  • One may use “REASONABLE FORCE” to prevent the commission of a tort against her REAL or PERSONAL property.
  • A request to desist or leave must first be made UNLESS it would clearly be FUTILE or DANGEROUS
  • Although defense does not apply once tort has been committed, one may use force in “HOT PURSUIT” of another who has tortiously dispossessed owner of chattel because the tort is still being viewed as continuing
78
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” - what is the requirement regarding a request to desist or leave?

A

A request to desist or leave must first be made UNLESS it would clearly be FUTILE or DANGEROUS

79
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” - what is the special rule regarding “hot pursuit”?

A
  • Although defense does not apply once tort has been committed, one MAY use force in “HOT PURSUIT” of another who has tortiously dispossessed owner of chattel because the tort is still being viewed as continuing
80
Q

What is the special rule regarding “Defense of Property” when the other party has a privilege to enter into land?

A

This defense is NOT AVAILABLE against one with a privilege to enter onto land of another because of necessity, recapture of chattel etc.

The privilege to enter land SUPERSEDES privilege of land possessor to defend property.

81
Q

What is the rule regarding “Defense of Property” and “mistake” ?

A

REASONABLE mistake IS allowed as to:

  1. whether an intrusion has occurred; or
  2. whether a request to desist is required

Mistake is NOT allowed as to:
-Whether entrant has a privilege that supersedes the defense of property right, unless the entrant conducts the entry so as to lead D to reasonably believe it is not privileged (ie..such as by refusing to say what the necessity is).

82
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” - how much force may be used?

A

Reasonable force may be used.

HOWEVER –> one may NOT use force causing death or serious bodily harm UNLESS the invasion of property also entails a serious threat of bodily harm

83
Q

What is the general rule regarding “Defense of Property” and recovery of chattel?

A
  • When another’s possession began lawfully (ie.. a conditional sale), one may use only peaceful means to recover the chattel.
  • Force may be used to recover chattel only when in “HOT PURSUIT” of once who has obtained possession wrongfully (ie..theft).
84
Q

What is the general rule regarding “Defense of Property” and recovery of chattel?

A
  • When another’s possession began lawfully (ie.. a conditional sale), one may use only peaceful means to recover the chattel.
  • Force may be used to recover chattel only when in “HOT PURSUIT” of once who has obtained possession wrongfully (ie..theft).
85
Q

What is the demand requirement with regards to “Defense of Property” and recovery of chattel?

A
  • A timely demand to return the chattel is first required UNLESS clearly FUTILE or DANGEROUS
86
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and recovery of chattel, on what do the rules regarding entry onto another’s land in order to recover chattel depend?

A

The ability to enter another’s land depends on whose land it is, or why the chattel is there:

  1. Wrongdoer’s land
  2. Innocent Party’s land
  3. On land through owner’s fault
87
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and recovery of chattel, on what do the rules regarding entry onto another’s land depend?

A

The ability to enter another’s land depends on whose land it is, or why the chattel is there:

  1. Wrongdoer’s land
  2. Innocent Party’s land
  3. On land through owner’s fault
88
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and entering another’s land to recover chattel, what is the rule if the chattel is located on an “INNOCENT PARTY’S LAND”?

A

If located on land of innocent party –> owner may enter and reclaim her chattel at a

  • reasonable time; and
  • in a peaceful manner; IF
  • the landowner has been given notice of the presence of the chattel and refuses to return it.
  • Note: the chattel owner’s right of recapture supersedes the landowner’s right to defend his property.
  • HOWEVER –> the chattel owner will be liable for any ACTUAL DAMAGE caused by the entry.
89
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and entering another’s land to recover chattel, what is the rule if the chattel is located on an “INNOCENT PARTY’S LAND”?

A

If located on land of innocent party –> owner may enter and reclaim her chattel at a

  • reasonable time; and
  • in a peaceful manner; IF
  • the landowner has been given notice of the presence of the chattel and refuses to return it.
  • Note: the chattel owner’s right of recapture supersedes the landowner’s right to defend his property.
  • HOWEVER –> the chattel owner will be liable for any ACTUAL DAMAGE caused by the entry.
90
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and entering another’s land to recover chattel, what is the rule if the chattel is located on another’s party’s land THROUGH THE OWNER’s OWN FAULT?

A
  • If the chattels are on the land of another through the owner’s own fault, there is NO privilege to enter onto the land.
  • They may be recovered through legal process.

Example —> cattle wander onto another’s land negligently

91
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and recapture of chattel, is “mistake” allowed?

A

Generally: no mistake regarding D’s right to recapture the chattel or enter onto the land is allowed.

EXCEPTION: shopkeepers MAY have a privilege to detain for a reasonable period of time individuals whom they reasonably believe to be in possession of shoplifted goods.

92
Q

With regards to “Defense of Property” and recapture of chattel, how much force may be used?

A

Reasonable force, not including force sufficient to cause death or serious bodily injury, may be used to recapture chattels.

93
Q

What is the “Privilege of Arrest”?

A

Depending on the facts, a person may have a privilege to make an arrest of a 3rd person.

94
Q

What is the rule regarding “Privilege of Arrest” and “Invasion of Land”?

A

The privilege of arrest carries with it a privilege to enter another’s land for the purpose of effecting the arrest.

95
Q

What is the rule regarding “Privilege of Arrest” and “Subsequent Misconduct”?

A

Although the arrest itself may be privileged, the actor may still be liable for subsequent misconduct.

Example –> failing to bring before magistrate, unduly detaining party

96
Q

When is “privilege of arrest” allowed for a “Misdemeanor”?

A

If the arrest is for a misdemeanor, it is privileged ONLY if:

  1. breach of peace; AND
  2. action takes place in front of defendant

NOTE: police may have broader privilege

97
Q

When is “privilege of arrest” allowed for a “felony”?

A

IF arrest by CITIZEN:

  1. Felony must have in fact been committed;
  2. Citizen “REASONABLY BELIEVES” person arrested committed it.

If arrest by POLICE:
Officer must REASONABLY BELIEVE a felony has been committed and that the person he arrests has committed it

98
Q

What is the rule regarding “privilege of arrest” and “mistake” if the offense is a FELONY?

A

Police officer —> May make a reasonable mistake

Citizen –> May make a reasonable mistake as to person arrested, but not as to whether a felony has been committed.

99
Q

With regards to “privilege of arrest” - what amount of force is permissible if the offense is a “misdemeanor”?

A

That degree of force reasonably necessary to make the arrest, but never deadly force.

100
Q

With regards to “privilege of arrest” - what amount of force is permissible if the offense is a “felony”?

A

That degree of force reasonably necessary to make the arrest, deadly force ONLY if suspect poses threat of SERIOUS HARM.

101
Q

With regards to “privilege of arrest” - what is the rule regarding “shoplifting detentions”?

A

A shopkeeper has a privilege to detain suspected shoplifter for investigation.

SEE ALSO: conditions.

102
Q

With regards to the “privilege of arrest” - what are the three conditions needed to allow a “shoplifting detention?

A

For the privilege to apply, the following conditions must be satisfied:

  1. “REASONABLE BELIEF” - there must be a “reasonable belief” as to the fact of the theft;
  2. “REASONABLE MANNER” - the detention must be conducted in a “reasonable manner” and only non deadly force can be used;
  3. “REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME” - the detention must be made only for a “reasonable period of time” and only for the purpose of making an investigation.
103
Q

What are the two types of “Necessity”?

A

There are TWO types of “Necessity”:

  1. “Public Necessity” - act is for public good
  2. “Private Necessity” - act only benefits limited number of people
104
Q

What are the two types of “Necessity”?

A

There are TWO types of “Necessity”:

  1. “Public Necessity” - act is for public good
  2. “Private Necessity” - act only benefits 1 or few people
105
Q

What is the special rule re: “Private Necessity”?

A

If the actor acts out of “Private Necessity,” he must pay for any damages he causes, UNLESS the act was to benefit the property owner.

106
Q

What kind of torts is “Necessity” a defense to?

A

“Necessity” is a defense to property torts only.

107
Q

What is the rule regarding the defense of “Discipline”?

A

A parent or teacher may use “reasonable force” in disciplining children.

Torts (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions