Torts

Question 1

Intentional Torts: Prima Facie Case

Answer 1

1) Act by D- requires some volitional movement.
2) Intent- specific or general
Specific- intent to bring about a specific harm;
General- substantial certainty that tortious conduct will result from D’s act.
3) Causation- D’s conduct must be a substantial factor in bringing about the resulting harm.

Question 2

Assault

Answer 2

An intentional act by D creating P’s reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact to P’s person.

Reasonable apprehension- P has knowledge of D’s act and an expectation that it will result in immediate harmful or offensive contact to P’s person.

P must apprehend an immediate or imminent battery.

Words or threats alone are usually insufficient, unless coupled with some overt act.

Question 3

Battery

Answer 3

An intentional harmful or offensive contact to P’s person by D.

Harmful or offensive is based on reasonable person standard.

P’s person includes anything connected to P’s person.

Question 4

False Imprisonment

Answer 4

An act or failure to act by D resulting in P’s restraint or confinement to a bounded area.

Restraint or confinement does not need to be physical (threats of force, invalid use of legal authority, etc.).

P must be aware of or harmed by the confinement;
P’s freedom of movement must be limited;
P must not be aware of any reasonable means of escape.

Question 5

Shopkeeper’s Privilege

Answer 5

A store may detain a suspected thief if:
1) Store has reasonable cause to believe a theft occurred;
2) Store detains suspect for only a reasonable period and for purposes of investigation; and
3) Detention is reasonable; only non-deadly force allowed.

Shopkeeper may be held liable for any harm caused by acts exceeding the privilege.

Question 6

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Answer 6

Extreme and outrageous conduct by D causing P’s severe emotional distress.

Conduct that exceeds the bounds of decency in society.

Non-outrageous conduct may be actionable if:
a) D targets P’s known sensitivity or weakness;
b) D’s conduct is continuous or repetitive;
c) D targets a P who is a member of a “fragile” class;
d) D is a common carrier or innkeeper.

P must suffer severe emotional distress from D’s conduct (physical symptoms not necessary).

Intent or Recklessness. Recklessness is D disregards the likely consequences of his acts.

Question 7

IIED: Bystander Claims for Emotional Distress

Answer 7

A bystander closely related to a person physically injured or killed by D’s conduct may recover for emotional distress.

Elements:
1) D’s conduct seriously injured or killed a third person (D’s conduct must be intentional or reckless);
2) P is closely related to the injured person ( not required if P shows that D had a design or purpose to cause P’s severe distress);
3) P was present when the injury occurred (P must clearly witness the injury-causing event);
4) D knew elements 2) and 3);
5) P suffers severe emotional distress (physical manifestation is not required).

Question 8

Trespass to Land

Answer 8

A physical invasion of P’s real property by D.

D enters P’s property or propels an object onto it.

P must only have actual or or constructive possession, ownership not required.

Must be a physical invasion (not light, sound, smell).

P’s real property includes surface space, airspace, and and subterranean space to a reasonable distance.

Intent to enter the land will suffice. D does not need to know the land belongs to another.

Question 9

Trespass to Chattel

Answer 9

D interferes with P’s right of possession in tangible personal property.

Interference usually occurs through dispossession.

P must have some loss of use. P can recover cost of repair or rental value of chattel.

Question 10

Conversion

Answer 10

Significant interference or damage that justifies D paying the chattel’s full value.

A longer and/or more damaging use of P’s chattel gives rise to conversion.

P can recover FMV at the time of conversion or repossess the chattel (replevin).

Question 11

Consent

Answer 11

A defense to all intentional torts.

If P consents to D’s otherwise tortious conduct, D is not liable for that act.

Express consent or Implied consent.

D can be liable for conduct that exceeds the scope of P’s valid consent.

Question 12

Self- defense

Answer 12

Requirements for all defenses:
1) Reasonable belief- D must reasonably believe a tort is being or about to be committed;
2) Proper timing- tort must be in progress or imminent;
3)Reasonable force- must be proportionate to threat of harm.

No duty to retreat;
Only available to initial aggressor if D responds to non-deadly force with deadly force.

Question 13

Defense of others

Answer 13

Requirements for all defenses:
1) Reasonable belief- D must reasonably believe a tort is being or about to be committed;
2) Proper timing- tort must be in progress or imminent;
3)Reasonable force- must be proportionate to threat of harm.

D must have reasonable belief that the person he is aiding would have have the right of self defense.

D may use as much force as he could have used if the injury was threatened to him.

Question 14

Defense of property

Answer 14

Requirements for all defenses:
1) Reasonable belief- D must reasonably believe a tort is being or about to be committed;
2) Proper timing- tort must be in progress or imminent;
3)Reasonable force- must be proportionate to threat of harm.

Available to prevent tort against property.
Unavailable if initial actor had a privilege to enter land ( recapturing chattel).
Reasonable mistake only allowed as to whether an intrusion occurred, not whether privilege existed.
D must request that interference stop before using force unless doing so would be futile or dangerous.

Question 15

Necessity

Answer 15

A defense to torts against property in which D damages P’s property in an effort to avoid a greater danger.

Requirements:
D’s interference with P’s property must be reasonably necessary to avoid an immediate threatened injury;
Threatened injury must be more serious than the interference undertaken to avert it.

Public necessity- absolute defense.
D’s invasion of property must be reasonably necessary to protect the community or a large group of people. P cannot recover any damages.

Private necessity- limited defense.
D invades P’s property to protect an individual or small group.
P can recover actual damages, but not punitive or nominal damages (unless D’s act benefitted P).

Question 16

Recapture of Chattels

Answer 16

A defense to trespass; D may use peaceful means to recover possession of chattel taken unlawfully.

D-owner must make a timely return of chattel (unless futile or dangerous). May recapture from original wrongdoer or a third person who knows the chattel was wrongfully obtained (not from innocent party).

Can enter wrongdoer’s property at reasonable time and manner.
Notice required to enter innocent part’s property. If landowner refuses entry, may enter at a reasonable time and in a peaceful manner.

If D’s chattel is on another’s property through D’s fault, D does not have privilege to enter property.

Reasonable force may be used to recapture chattel if in hot pursuit of one who has wrongfully obtained possession. No deadly force or serious bodily harm permitted.

Question 17

Defamation

Answer 17

A statement concerning P, made by D to a third person, that is harmful to P’s reputation.

If a statement involves a matter of public concern or a public figure or official, falsity and fault may be required.

1) Defamatory statement- adversely affects P’s reputation (must be based on specific facts);
2) Concerning P- must be reasonably understood that the statement concerns a living P or a very small group of P’s;
3) Publication- statement must be intentionally or negligently made to a third person;
4) Harmful to P’s reputation;
5) Falsity and fault- only required if statement involved a matter of concern or a public figure or official.

The republisher of a defamatory statement is liable to the same extent as the original publisher.

Damages- P’s burden in proving damages depends on whether the defamatory statement was libel or slander.

Question 18

Defamation: Constitutional Considerations

Answer 18

1st Amendment considerations arise when defamation involves a public figure, public official, and/or a matter of public concern.

Public Figure- one who has pervasive fame or notoriety, or who voluntarily assumes a central role in a public matter.

Public Official- public office holder.

Matter of Public Concern- statement relates to a community interest or concern (includes national interest).

Additional Elements: if defamation involves a matter of public concern, P must prove:
1) Falsity- P must prove the statement was false; and
2) Fault- P must prove D was at fault; standards differ for public vs. private figures:
Public official or figure- actual malice standard (knowledge of the statement’s falsity or reckless disregard to whether it was false)
Private figure- negligence standard.

Question 19

Defamation: Damages Considerations

Answer 19

Damages depend on whether the defamatory statement constitutes libel, slander, or slander per se.

Libel- A written defamatory statement.
General damages are presumed; P does not have to prove special damages.

Slander- A spoken defamatory statement.
P must prove special damages unless the statement constitutes slander per se.

Slander per se- a defamatory statement that either:
A) Concerns and adversely reflects on P’s business or professional reputation;
B) Claims that P has a loathsome disease;
C) Claims that P committed a crime of moral turpitude; or
D) Imputes a woman’s chastity.

Question 20

Defenses to Defamation

Answer 20

Consent

Truth- truth is a complete defense to a defamation claim.

Privilege
Absolute Privilege- protects statements by government officials in their official capacity.
Qualified Privilege- D’s liability for defamatory statements is limited if the purpose of the speech is to promote truthfulness and/or related to fair comment and criticism (letter of recommendation, employment reference, book review, accurate reports of public proceedings).

Question 21

Invasion of Privacy Torts: Appropriation

Answer 21

Use of P’s name or likeness for commercial purposes with P’s consent.

Newsworthiness exception- no liability for use of P’s name or likeness for the purpose of reporting news.

Question 22

Invasion of Privacy Torts: False Light

Answer 22

Widespread publication of a falsehood or material misrepresentation about P that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.

Includes mischaracterization of P’s views or conduct.

Matters of Public Concern- D must have actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth of the matter publicized.

Question 23

Defenses to Appropriation and False Light

Answer 23

Consent- valid defense, although D may be liable if his actions exceed the consent given.
Mistake as to if consent is given is not a valid defense.

Privilege- may be available as a defense to false light if D has an absolute or qualified privilege to publication.

Truth is not a valid defense to invasion of privacy claims.

Question 24

Intrusion upon seclusion

Answer 24

Intrusion upon P’s private affairs in a manner that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.

Requirements:
1) P must have a reasonable expectation of privacy (no reasonable expectation of privacy in public); and
2) Intrusion must be highly offensive (peeping, eavesdropping, using hidden cameras in P’s domain).

No newsworthiness exception.

Question 25

Disclosure

Answer 25

Public disclosure of P’s private information.

Requirements- disclosure must be:
1) Highly offensive to a reasonable person (public activities are not objectionable). D announces mayor frequents strip clubs is no liability since it occurs in public.
2) Publicized- made available to a public audience.

Newsworthiness exception- no liability if private facts are newsworthy.

Consent is a valid defense; privilege is a valid defense to disclosure.

Question 26

Malicious Prosecution

Answer 26

Arises when D initiates a frivolous charge or claim against P with an improper purpose ( filing a false police report).

Elements:
1) D commenced a prior criminal or civil legal proceeding against P (prosecutors immune);
2) Proceeding terminated in P’s favor;
3) No probable cause for the original proceeding (D knew P was not guilty (criminal) or liable (civil) or had sufficient facts to reasonably believe in P’s guilt or fault;
4) D had an improper purpose in initiating the proceeding; and
5) Damages.

Question 27

Abuse of Process

Answer 27

Arises when D uses the legal system as an ulterior purpose to threaten or act against P.

Elements:
1) Wrongful use of process for an ulterior purpose; and
2) Definite act or threat against P to accomplish an ulterior purpose.

Question 28

Intentional Mistepresentation

Answer 28

Elements:
1) D misrepresents a past or present material fact;
2) D knows or believes the misrepresentation is false;
3) D intends to induce P to act or refrain from acting in reliance on the misrepresentation;
4) Actual reliance by P;
5) Justifiable reliance by P (P must be justified in relying on the misrepresentation); and
6) Damages- P must suffer monetary loss.

Question 29

Negligent Misrepresentation

Answer 29

Elements:
1) D misrepresents a past or present material fact in a business or professional setting;
2) Breach of duty of care owed to a particular P (D knew P could rely on the misrepresentation);
3) Actual and justifiable reliance by P; and
4) Damages- P must suffer monetary loss.

Question 30

Intentional Interference with Business Relations

Answer 30

Arises when a third party interferes with an existing contract.

Elements:
1) P has a valid contractual relationship or business expectancy (includes contracts between P and third party);
2) D has knowledge of the relationship or expectancy;
3) D intentionally interferes with that relationship (must be intentional- negligence is insufficient) ;
4) D’s interference causes a breach or termination in P’s contract or expectancy; and
5) Damages.

Privilege defenses- D’s conduct may be privileged when it is a proper attempt to obtain business or protect his interests (competing for P’s customers).

Question 31

Negligence: Elements and Standards

Answer 31

Elements:
1) Duty of Care
D has a duty to conform to a specific standard of care
Unless an alternative standard of care applies, D’s duty is to behave like a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances presented;

2) Breach of duty;

3) Causation- Actual cause and proximate cause.
(MBE may refer to as “cause-in-fact” or “factual cause” and “legal cause”;

4) Damages

Negligence basics
Negligence is analyzed under an objective standard by comparing D’s actions to a reasonable person under similar circumstances.

Question 32

Duty of Care

Answer 32

D owes a duty of care - to behave like a reasonably prudent person - to all foreseeable plaintiffs in the zone of danger.

RPP is considered to be someone with D’s physical characteristics, but with the knowledge and mental capacity of an ordinary person.

Foreseeable victims:

Zone of danger- the area around D’s activities in which a P could foreseeable be injured.

Rescuer’s exception- if D puts himself or another in danger and a third person attempts to rescue, D can be held liable for the rescuer’s injuries, even if unforeseeable.

Prenatal injury- a duty of care is owed to a viable fetus.

Intended economic beneficiaries- a duty of care is owed to third-party beneficiaries if their harm is foreseeable.

Question 33

Specialized Standards of Care

Answer 33

Children

Common carriers and innkeepers

Custom or usage in an industry

Professionals

Statutory standard of care

Owners/occupiers of land

Question 34

Statutory Standards of Care and Negligence Per Se

Answer 34

An existing statute may establish a duty of care, in which case the specific duty imposed by the statute will replace the general common law duty of care.

Negligence Per Se- violation of the statute means P must only prove causation, or breach of duty. Under majority rule, violation operates as a conclusive presumption of duty and breach of that duty. Compliance does not automatically clear D of liability.

Requirements:
1) The statute provides a criminal penalty;
2) Standard odd conduct is clearly defined in the statute;
3) P is within the class of people the statute was designed to protect; and
4) The statute was designed to protect against the type of harm P suffered.

Statutory standard of care does not apply if:
A) Compliance is more dangerous than non-compliance; or
B) Compliance is impossible under the circumstances.

Question 35

Unknown or undiscovered trespassers

Answer 35

No duty owed.

Question 36

Anticipated trespassers

Answer 36

Where owner has reason to believe of trespassers on her land.

Activities- owner has duty of reasonable care in carrying out activities on her property.

Dangerous conditions- owner has duty to make safe or warn of any known, concealed, man- made hazards.

Question 37

Attractive Nuisance Doctrine for Child Trespassers

Answer 37

Owner must take reasonable care to eliminate dangers on her property or protect children from those dangers if:

1) She is aware or should be aware of a dangerous condition (natural or artificial) on her property;
2) She knows or should know children are in the vicinity;
3) The condition is likely to cause injury if encountered; and
4) The magnitude of the risk outweighs its utility or the expense of remedying it.

Question 38

Licensee and Invitee

Answer 38

Licensee- One who enters land with owner’s permission for his own purpose or business (not for landowner’s purpose). (Relatives, friends, social guests).

Invitee- One who enters land held open to the public or who enters with owner’s permission to confer a commercial benefit (store patron, concert-goer).

Duty of Care owed:
Activities carried out on property- reasonable care.
Known dangerous conditions- duty to warn or make safe.
Duty to inspect-
N/A for licensees
Invitees- owners have duty to conduct a reasonable inspection for non-obvious dangers and make them safe. (Only significant difference between licensees and invitees).

Scope of Duty- owner’s duty extends only to those areas where one is an invitee or licensee (store owner does not owe duty of care in employees-only area).

Police and firefighters are considered licensees, but cannot recover for injuries suffered in the line of duty if the injury results from a risk inherent in the job.

Question 39

Breach of Duty

Answer 39

D breaches duty when his conduct falls short of the standard of care owed under the circumstances.

To demonstrate a breach, P can argue:
A) D breached the applicable standard of care- includes:
- RPP standard;
- Negligence per se;
- Specialized standard of care;
- Custom or usage in a industry - not an automatic breach, but may be relevant.

B) Res Ipsa loquitur - the very occurrence of the accident causing P’s injuries suggests negligent conduct. Arises if facts cannot establish breach of duty because circumstances surrounding the event are unknown to P.

Requirements- P must show:
1) Inference of negligence - the harm would not normally occur absent negligence;
2) Attributable to D - this type of harm normally results from negligence by one in D’s position (often satisfied by showing that the injury-causing instrument was in D’s exclusive control); and
3) Injury was not attributable to P.

Question 40

Actual Cause

Answer 40

Establishes a causal relationship between the alleged breach of duty and the resulting injury.

“But-for” test- but for D’s alleged breach of duty, P’s injury would not have occurred.

Substantial factor test- for multiple causes of P’s injury:
D’s breach is the actual cause if it was a substantial factor in bringing about P’s injury.
Used if multiple causes bring about P’s injury and any one of them alone would have caused the injury.

Burden-shifting test- for several possible causes of P’s injury:
Used if multiple D’s act (often simultaneously), only one causes P’s injury, but it’s unclear which D causes the injury.
Burden of proving actual cause shifts to D’s. If no D can prove another D was responsible, all D’s are jointly and severally liable.

Question 41

Proximate Cause

Answer 41

Establishes that it is fair under the law to hold D responsible for P’s injuries.

Foreseeability- measuring stick for proximate cause.
D is liable for the foreseeable outcome of his conduct.

Direct causes- if P’s injury is the direct consequence of D’s negligent conduct, D is liable unless the outcome is unusually bizarre or unpredictable.

Indirect/intervening causes- where contributing acts occur after D’s conduct and combine with that conduct to cause P’s injuries.
D is usually liable in injury could have possibly resulted even without the intervening forces.
Approach: consider the type of harm being protected against by holding D negligent for his conduct. If P’s resulting injury is the type being protected against, D’s conduct is the foreseeable, legal cause of P’s injury.

Question 42

Eggshell Plaintiff Rule

Answer 42

D takes P as he finds him and is liable for the full extent of P’s injuries, regardless of whether they are foreseeable.

Question 43

Damages

Answer 43

Damages
P must prove damages, which are not presumed in negligence cases; nominal damages are not available.

Types of damages:
Personal- D must compensate P for all damages. Includes past, present, and prospective damages. Economic and non-economic damages are available.

Property- P can recover reasonable cost of repair. If property is irreparable, damages = FMV at the time the accident occurred.

Punitive- only recoverable if D’s conduct is wanton and willful, reckless, or malicious.

Non- recoverable damages- P can never for:
-Interest from the date of damage in personal injury cases; and
-Attorney’s fees.

Duty to mitigate- P has a duty to take reasonable steps to mitigate damages.

Question 44

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

Answer 44

P may recover for emotional distress resulting from D’s negligence, but only if P’s emotional distress gives rise to some physical manifestation.

Elements:
D’s negligence results in a close risk of bodily harm to p
P must be in zone of danger to recover

D’s negligence results in p’s severe emotional distress

P exhibits some physical manifestation attributable to her emotional distress
Non physical symptoms (nightmares or depression) are insufficient.
Symptoms of the physical manifestation can be instantaneous or appear data later.

Question 45

Bystander Claims

Answer 45

P-bystanders outside the zone of danger may recover for emotional distress resulting from D’s negligence if:
P and the injured person are closely related;
P was present at the scene of the injury; and
P personally observed or perceived the event.

Question 46

Strict Liability: Prima Facie Case

Answer 46

Under strict liability, D has an absolute duty to make activities safe that.
Allows p to establish D’s liability for p’s injuries without proving d acted negligently.

Prima Facie case:
Nature of D’s activity imposes an absolute duty to make safe;
Causation- actual and proximate cause (dangerous aspect of D’s activity caused p’s injury; and
Damages to P’s person or property.

Defenses- assumption of risk, comparative negligence.

Question 47

Abnormally Dangerous Conditions

Answer 47

Requirements:
The condition or activity imposes a severe risk of harm to persons or property;
It cannot be made reasonably safe; and
The condition or activity is uncommon in the community.

Question 48

Animal Conduct

Answer 48

Property damage from trespassing animals- animal owners are strictly liable for reasonably foreseeable damage resulting from their animal’s trespass on another’s property. Does not apply to household pets.

Personal injuries:
Wild Animals- owners are strictly liable to licensees and invitees for unprovoked injuries caused by their wild animals.

Domestic Animals- no strict liability unless owners know of their animal’s unusually dangerous propensities.

Trespassers cannot recover- trespassers are generally not entitled to recovery under strict liability.

Question 49

Products Liability

Answer 49

Elements:
D is a commercial supplier (one who routinely deals in the product sold, including any merchant in the stream of commerce);

Product is defective. Defect must make product unreasonably dangerous; and

Defective product was actual and proximate cause of P’s injury.
-Product must not be substantially altered between leaving commercial supplier and reaching consumer; and

P used the product in a foreseeable manner.
P’s misuse of the product can be foreseeable.

Who can sue? Foreseeable users or bystanders (buyers as well as their guests, employees, family, etc.).

Damages- p can recover for physical injury or property damage, but not solely for economic losses.

Question 50

Manufacturing Defect

Answer 50

Product departs from its intended design, causing it to be more dangerous than designed.

P must show that the product failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect.

Question 51

Design Defect

Answer 51

Product creates an unreasonable risk of danger due to its faulty design.

P must show that a hypothetical alternative design exists that is safer but has a comparable cost and purpose.

Question 52

Inadequate Warning

Answer 52

Manufacturer fails to adequately warn of a non-obvious risk associated with a product’s use.

Manufacturer also has a duty to warn of foreseeable dangers from misuse of the product.

P must show that the product has risks that :
1) cannot be eliminated by redesign; and
2) consumers would not ordinarily notice.

Unavoidably unsafe products- if product cannot be made safe for its ordinary use (chainsaw, firearms, etc.), a manufacturer must give:
1) proper instructions for use; and
2) adequate warnings of known dangers.

D is not liable for risks that were unforeseeable at the time the product was marketed.

Question 53

Products Liability: Negligence Theory

Answer 53

P may establish liability for a product defect under standard negligence theory.

Elements:
1) Duty of care- each commercial supplier in the stream of commerce owes a duty to all foreseeable product users and bystanders;
2) Breach of duty- D’s negligence leads tot he supplying of a defective product. Retailers and wholesalers satisfy due care by a cursory inspection of the product (this makes it difficult to hold them negligent for product defects).
3) Causation- P must show actual and proximate cause.
An intermediary’s negligent failure to discover a defect does not absolve the upstream commercial supplier of liability; and
4) Damages- P must show physical injury or property damage.
Economic loss alone is not recoverable.

Defenses- all standard negligence defenses are available.

Products liability as battery- if a commercial supplier places a product into the stream of commerce knowing that it may harm someone, this gives rise to a tort of battery.

Question 54

Implied Warranties

Answer 54

Elements
1) Warranty- existence of an implied warranty;
2) Breach- product fails to live up to applicable warranty;
3) Causation- actual and proximate cause; and
4) Damages- personal, property, and economic are all recoverable.

Defenses- assumption of risk, contributory, and comparative negligence.

Question 55

Misrepresentation of Fact

Answer 55

Seller will be liable for any misrepresentation made in course of a sale if:
1) seller made a misrepresentation regarding a material fact concerning the quality or use of goods;
2) seller intended to induce reliance by buyer; and
3) the misrepresentation induced justifiable reliance.

Question 56

Private Nuisance

Answer 56

A substantial, unreasonable interference with another individuals use or enjoyment of her property.

Substantial interference- must be offensive, annoying, or inconvenient to the average person in the community.
Interference is not substantial if P is hypersensitive or using property for a specialized, abnormal purpose.

Unreasonable interference- severity of P’s injury must outweigh the utility of D’s conduct.

Question 57

Public Nuisance

Answer 57

Unreasonable interference with health, safety, or property rights of the community at large.

Recovery is only available to a private party if she suffered unique damage not suffer by the public at large.

Government usually brings public nuisance suits.

Remedies- money damages, injunctive relief.

Question 58

Doctrine of Respondeat Superior

Answer 58

Employers are liable for torts committed by employees within the scope of their employment.

Intentional torts are usually outside the scope, unless
A) the job requires use of force (bouncer);
B) the job entails creating friction, or
C) the intentional tort is done to further the employer’s goals

Independent contractors- generally not liable unless inherently dangerous or non-delegable.

Partnership- each partner is vicariously liable for any other partner’s torts committed within the scope of the partnership.

Parent-child- not liable for their children’s torts But may be separately negligent if knew of or had reason to know of a child’s propensity to injure or they facilitated the tort.

Tavernkeepers- may be held liable if served intoxicated person and then injured P.

Question 59

Joint and Several Liabiliy

Answer 59

Arises if the acts of two or more D’s combine to produce a single indivisible injury.

Each D is jointly and severally liable for the entire harm if his actions were a factor in bringing about P’s injury.

Satisfaction- if P recovers fully from one D, she may not recover more from a jointly liable D.

Question 60

Contribution

Answer 60

D who pays more than her share of damages under joint and several liability can assert a clam against jointly liable parties for the excess paid.