T Flashcards
BATTERY
1) INTENT
2) HARMFUL OR OFFENSIVE CONTACT
ASSAULT
1) INTENT
2) REASONABLE APPREHENSION OF AN IMMINENT BATTERY
TRESPASS TO CHATTEL
1) INTENT
2) INTERFERENCE W USE
3) REMEDY= ACTUAL DAMAGES
CONVERSION
1) INTENT
2) SUBSTANTIAL INTERFERENCE W USE
3) REMEDY= FMV OF PROPERTY AT CONVERSION
TRESPASS TO LAND
1) INTENT
2) PHYSICAL INVASION OF LAND
IIED
1) INTENT OR RECKLESSNESS
2) EXTREME AND OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT
3) SEVERE EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
BYSTANDER RULE IIED
1) CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER
2) D HAD KNOWLEDGE
3) SEVERE ED
NON FAMILY MEMBER BYSTANDERS IIED
BYSTANDER MUST SUFFER PHYSICAL HARM
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
1) INTENT
2) CONFINED, BOUNDED AREA
3) AWARE OF CONFINEMENT
SHOPKEEPER PRIVILEGE
1) REASONABLE BELIEF
2) DETAINED IN A REASONABLE MANNER
3) REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME
NEGLIGENT TRESPASS TO LAND
1) NEGLIGENTLY ENTER LAND OF ANOTHER
2) LIABLE FOR DAMAGE TO LAND
NEGLIGENT IIED
1) NEGLIGENT CONDUCT
2) ZONE OF DANGER
3) SEVERE EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND PHYSICAL HARM
BYSTANDER RULE NIED
1) CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER
2) EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
MISHANDLING OF A CORPSE
1) NEGLIGENT HANDLING OF A CORPSE
2) NO PHYSICAL HARM REQ’D
TRANSFERRED INTENT
D INTENDS TO COMMIT A TORT, BUT COMMITS:
1) A DIFF TORT OR
2) THE SAME TORT AGAINST A DIFF PERSON
TRANSFERRED INTENT, BOTH TORTS MUST BE FROM THE FOLLOWING:
ASSAULT
BATTERY
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
TRESPASS TO LAND
TRESPASS TO CHATTEL
DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS; CONSENT
1) IMPLIED OR EXPRESS
2) CANNOT EXCEED SCOPE OF CONSENT
DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS; SELF DEFENSE
1) REASONABLE BELIEF OF ATTACK
2) REASONABLE FORCE
DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS; DEFENSE OF OTHERS
REASONABLE BELIEF THIRD PARTY TO BE ATTACKED
DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS; DEFENSE OF PROPERTY
1) REASONABLE FORCE
2) REASONABLE BELIEF TO STOP INVASION OF LAND
3) CANNOT USE DEADLY FORCE TO DEFEND PROPERTY
PRIVATE NECESSITY
DEFENSE TO TRESPASS
LIABLE FOR DAMAGES TO PROPERTY
PUBLIC NECESSITY
1) PREVENTING PUBLIC HARM
2) NOT LIABLE FOR DAMAGES TO PROPERTY
NEGLIGENCE
1) DUTY
2) BREACH
3) CAUSATION
4) DAMAGES
DUTY
OWED TO FORSEEABLE PLAINTIFFS
STANDARD OF CARE
REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON
UNKNOWN TRESPASSER
NO DUTY OF CARE
KNOWN TRESPASSER
WARN OF KNOWN DANGERS
LICENSEE
SOCIAL GUEST
WARN OF KNOWN DANGERS
INVITEE
BUSINESSES
WARN, INSPECT, AND MAKE SAFE
DUTY OF A PARENT
KNEW/ SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT CHILD WAS LIKELY TO CAUSE HARM
NO GENERAL DUTY TO RESCUE UNLESS
1) ASSUMPTION OF DUTY
2) SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
COMMON CARRIER
INNKEEPER/GUEST
TEACHER/STUDENT
EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE
DUTY OF A CHILD
OTHER CHILDREN OF SAME AGE, EXPERIENCE, AND MATURITY
DUTY OF A PROFESSIONAL
SIMILAR PROFESSIONALS W THE SAME EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND CUSTOMS
EXAMPLE:
o Doctor
o Lawyer
o Professional Athlete
BREACH OF DUTY
FAILURE TO COMPLY W DUTY OF CARE
ACTUAL CAUSATION
BUT FOR
ALMOST ALWAYS MET
PROXIMATE CAUSATION
FORSEEABILITY
DAMAGES
PHYSICAL INJURY
INTERVENING CAUSE
FORSEEABLE EVENT
PAY ALL DAMAGES
SUPERSEDING CAUSE
UNFORSEEABLE EVENT
CUTS OFF LIABILITY
ACT OF GOD, INTENTIONAL TORT, CRIMINAL ACT
NEGLIGENCE PER SE
1) VIOLATION OF ORDINANCE/ STATUTE
2) INJURED PARTY IS OF PROTECTED CLASS
3) INJURY IS OF THE TYPE STATUTE WAS TRYING TO PREVENT
RES IPSA LOQUITOR
CREATES AN INFERENCE OF NEGLIGENCE IF
1) ACCIDENT WOULD NOT NORMALLY OCCUR ULESS NEGLIGENCE
2) DEFENDANT HAD EXCLUSIVE CONTROL
MODIFIED/ MODERN COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE
PLAINTIFF CANNOT RECOVER IF MORE THAN 50% AT FAULT
PURE COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE
P’S DAMAGES REDUCED BY % OF FAULT
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
P CANNOT RECOVER IF AT FAULT
LAST CLEAR CHANCE EXCEPTION
D HAD LAST CLEAR CHANCE TO AVOID ACCIDENT
D DID NOT DO SO
P CAN RECOVER
ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK
MUST HAVE KNOWLEDGE
MUST APPRECIATE THE DANGER
JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY
2 OR MORE PPL CAUSE SINGLE ACCIDENT
ALL D’S JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES
CONTRIBUTION
CO-DEFENDANTS CAN SUE TO RECOUP MONEY
VICARIOUS LIABILITY
EMPLOYER LIABLE FOR NEGLIGENT EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEES ACTING W/IN SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT
INDEPENDANT CONTRACTORS- GENERALLY NOT LIABLE UNLESS
1) ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITY
2) NON DELEGABLE DUTY
NON DELEGABLE DUTY
DUTIES THT INVOLVE SAFETY OR BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC
EXAMPLE :
Non-Delegable Duty:
o Chop off ice on sidewalk
o Clean windows
o Polish floor in office building
Not a Non-Delegable Duty:
o Redoing Jon’s bathroom
INDEMNIFICATION
MAY SEEK INDEMNIFICATION FROM WHOEVER ACTUALLY CAUSED THE DAMAGE
STRICT LIABILITY
1) POSSESSION OF WILD ANIMALS
2) ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITIES
POSSESSION OF WILD ANIMALS
NON-DOMESTICATED ANIMALS
INJURY THT WOULD NORMALLY OCCUR
DOMESTIC ANIMALS W DANGEROUS PROPENSITIES
Examples:
Wild animals:
o Lions, tigers, and bears
Not Wild animals:
o Dogs and cats
ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITY
EXCAVATION
DYNAMITE
TOXIC CHEMICAL
DEFENSES TO STRICT LIABILITY; ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK
DEFENSE TO STRICT LIABILITY
KNEW AND APPRECIATED THE RISK
PRODUCT LIABILITY
A PRODUCT BREAKS OR DOESNT WORK PROPERLY
3 CAUSES OF ACTION
1) NEGLIGENCE
2) BREACH OF WARRANTY
3) STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY
PRODUCTS LIABILITY- NEGLIGENCE
NEGLIGENCE IN THE CHAIN CAUSED THE PRODUCT TO BREAK OR NOT WORK
PRODUCTS LIABILITY - BREACH OF WARRANTY
PROMISE ABOUT PRODUCT PERFORMANCE
MERCHANTABILITY
PRODUCT ACTED AS IT SHOULD
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
PRODUCT ONLY WORKS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE
Examples:
o Hurricane windows can withstand certain wind
speeds
o Tires can only withstand speed up to a certain
mph
o Phone can only make so many phone calls
STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY
1) DEFECTIVE PRODUCT
2) SOLD BY COMMERCIAL SELLER
3) FORESEEABLE USER
4) USED IN MANNER IT WAS INTENDED
COMMERCIAL SELLER
IN THE BUSINESS OF SELLING THE PRODUCT
INADEQUATE/FAILURE TO WARN
A TYPE OF DEFECTIVE PRODUCT UNDER STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY
DEFENSES TO STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY
1) ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK
2) MISUSE
PRIVATE NUISANCE
UNREASONABLE INTERFERENCE W USE AND ENJOYMENT
OBJECTIVE STANDARD
PUBLIC NUISANCE
UNREASONABLE INTERFERENCE TO PUBLIC
BROUGHT BY GOV OFFICIAL
PRIVATE PLAINTIFFS MUST PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES
Examples:
o Contaminated water
o Electric lines that are emanating nuclear power
DEFAMATION
1) FALSE STATEMENT
2) ABOUT PLAINTIFF
3) HURTS REPUTATION
4) PUBLICATION
5) DAMAGES
PUBLICATION
HEARD AND UNDERSTOOD BY THIRD PERSON TO BE ABOUT THE PLAINTIFF
LIBEL
WRITTEN OR PRINTED
NO SPECIAL/PECUNIARY DAMAGES
SLANDER
SPOKEN
MUST PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES
SLANDER PER SE
DAMAGES PRESUMED:
1) PROFESSION
2) CHASTITY OF A WOMAN
3) CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE
4) LOATHSOME DISEASE
DEFAMATION- PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
STANDARD OF PROOF: NEGLIGENCE
DEFAMATION- PUBLIC FIGURE
STANDARD OF PROOF: ACTUAL MALICE
KNOWLEDGE OR RECKLESS DISREGARD OF THE TRUTH
DEFENSES TO DEFAMATION
1) TRUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE TO DEFAMATION
2) PRIVILEGES
ABSOLUTE PRIVILEGE
STATEMENTS MADE IN THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE PROTECTED
Examples:
o Court Appearances
o Government officials yelling at each other
QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE
STATEMENT APPEARS NECESSARY TO PROTECT DEFENDANTS/ PUBLICS INTEREST
HONEST AND REASONABLE BELIEF
Examples:
o Request to make a statement on your behalf
o Letter of Recommendation/Character Reference
INVASION OF PRIVACY; FALSE LIGHT
PORTRAY SOMEONE IN FALSE LIGHT
INVASION OF PRIVACY; APPROPRIATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE OF LIKENESS OR IMAGE FOR PROFIT
INVASION OF PRIVACY; PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF A PRIVATE MATTER
NOT NEWS WORTHY
Examples:
o Things you put out there yourself
o Kardashian’s TV show
INVASION OF PRIVACY; INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION
PHYSICAL INVASION OF A PRIVATE SPACE
INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
1) MISREP OF MATERIAL FACT
2) SCIENTER
3) INTENT TO INDUCE RELIANCE
4) RELIANCE
5) DAMAGES
NEGLIGENT MISREP
1) NEGLIGENCE
2) SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
3) DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE
4) DAMAGES
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE W CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP
1) K EXIST
2) D HAS KNOWLEDGE
3) INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE
4) DAMAGES
Example:
o Agency in sports or movie business
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
1) CRIMINAL PROCEEDING
2) NO PROBABLE CAUSE
3) IMPROPER PURPOSE
4) DISMISSED IN FAVOR OF ACCUSED
A PERSON WHO HIRES AN IC ORD IS NOT LIABLE FOR INJURY TO A 3RD PARTY CAUSED BY THE IC’S NEGLIGENCE
EXCEPTION
WHEN THE PERSON DIRECTLY INFLUENCES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE IC PERFORMS THE WORK
A COMMERCIAL SELLER OF A NONDEFECTIVE COMPONENT PART THT IS INCORPORATED INTO A FINISHED PRODUCT BY THE PRODUCTS MANUFACTURER IS NOT STRICTLY LIABLE FOR INJURIES CAUSED BY THE PRODUCT UNLESS
THE SELLER SUBSTANTIALLY PARTICIPATED IN THE INTEGRATION OF THE PART INTO THE DESIGN OF THE FINISHED PRODUCT AND
THE INTEGRATION OF THE COMPONENT IS WHAT RENDERED THE FINISHED PRODUCT DEFECTIVE