Torts Flashcards

1
Q

Nuisance

A

Substantial interference with the use and enjoyment of real estate
*interference is measured according to an ordinary reasonable person

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

Attractive nuisance

A

A defendant must take reasonably prudent care to protect children from artificial hazards.

Elements:

  • Dangerous condition D is aware of
  • Owner aware children may trespass
  • Condition likely to injure
  • Expense of fixing < size of risk
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Assault

A

act putting plaintiff in reasonable apprehension (awareness, NOT fear, more than words)
of an immediate battery

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

Battery

A

harmful/offensive contact

contact with plaintiff’s person

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

Possessor’s duty to unknown trespassers

A

No duty owed

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

Possessor’s duty to known/anticipated trespassers

A

“known, manmade death traps”

duty to eliminate/warn of artificial, highly dangerous, concealed conditions that defendant has knowledge of

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

Possessor’s duty to licensees

A

“all known traps”

duty to eliminate/warn of concealed risks defendant knows of in advance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Possessor’s duty to invitees

A

“all reasonably knowable traps”

dut to warn/eliminate concealed risks known in advance or could discover through reasonable inspection

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

requirements for all intentional torts

A

Act
Intent
Causation

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

Torts where transferred intent is available

A

assault, battery, FI, trespass to land, trespass to chattels

**both tort intended AND tort that results must be from this list

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

False imprisonment

A

an act/omission confining/restraining the plaintiff to a bounded area

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

IIED

A

extreme + outrageous conduct (recklessness is enough)

results in severe ED

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

IIED, bystander case

A

plaintiff present at injury
plaintiff related to victim
defendant knew of relationship

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

trespass to land

A

physical invasion of plaintiff’s property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

trespass to chattels

A

act interfering with the plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel
damages required

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

conversion

A

act interfering with the plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel, which results in destruction so severe that the defendant should pay FMV
damages required

17
Q

shoplifting detentions

A

shopkeeper can detain if

  • reasonable belief on theft
  • detention in reasonable manner
  • detention for reasonable time
18
Q

duties of care of children

A

0-5: no duty of care owed
5-18: hypothetical child of similar age, intelligence, experience

engaged in adult activity –> held to adult standard

19
Q

requirements for negligence per se

A

criminal statute imposing a specific duty
plaintiff is a member of the persons statute is designed to protect
harm suffered is what the statute is designed to protect

20
Q

NIED - near miss

A

plaintiff is in the “zone of danger”

plaintiff suffered physical symptoms from distress

21
Q

NIED - bystander cases

A

plaintiff and victim were closely related

plaintiff was present at the scene and perceived the event

22
Q

NIED - special relationships

A

highly foreseeable careless performance by defendant due to their relationship

23
Q

Res Ipsa

A

accident causing the injury would not normally occur unless someone was negligent
negligence is probably attributable to the defendant

24
Q

Contributory negligence (+ defense)

A

plaintiff’s own negligence completely bars recovery
UNLESS last clear chance - last person with the chance to avoid an accident who fails to do so is liable
+ assumption of risk

25
Comparative negligence
plaintiff's contributory negligence reduces damages they can collect pure comparative negligence (DEFAULT): reduce by P's % partial comparative negligence: P collects only if less than 50% liable
26
requirements for products liability based on SL
1. merchant 2. dangerous defect in product (manufacturing, design, mislabeled) 3. defect existed when left defendant 4. plaintiff used the product in a foreseeable way
27
defamation
``` defamatory statement publication damage to reputation (presumed for libel, slander per se) falsity fault (public figure vs. private figure) ```
28
invasion of privacy - 4 types
appropriation of plaintiffs picture or name intrusion on plaintiff's affairs/seclusion publication of facts placing plaintiff in a false light public disclosure of private facts about the plaintiff
29
abnormally dangerous activities
- foreseeable risk of serious harm even when reasonable care is exercised - activity isn't a matter of common usage in the community
30
theories of liability that apply to products (5)
- intent - negligence - IW merchantability/fitness for a PP - representation (express warranty/misrepresentation) - strict liability
31
types of defects under products liability
manufacturing defect: manufactured differently from other products design defect: if P can show D could have made product safer without serious impact on the product's utility/price information defect: failure to give adequate warnings of an unreasonable, hidden risk
32
product liability based on negligence
- P can use res ipsa - intermediary's failure to discover a defect won't supersede negligence - intermediary can fulfill duty through a cursory inspection
33
defenses to product strict liability (contributory vs comparative negligence states)
contributory: assumption of risk, unreasonable misuse comparative: any type of fault will reduce the recovery
34
interference with business relations
- valid contractual relationship or valid business expectancy - knowledge of relationship/expectancy - intentional interference - damages
35
definition of actual malice
knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard as to falsity (subjective inquiry)
36
negligent misrepresentation
``` misrepresentation in a personal/business capacity breach of duty causation justifiable reliance damages ```
37
intentional misrepresentation
``` misrepresentation scienter (knew/reckless disregard was false) intent to induce reliance causation justifiable reliance damages ```
38
Scope of employment definition
1) employee is expressly authorized to do something | 2) acts are in the same nature as employee's job
39
proximate cause definition
a defendant is liable for results that are the normal incidents of, or an increased risk caused by, their acts