torts Flashcards
What are the elements of false imprisonment?
1) The defendant intends to confine or restrain the plaintiff within a limited area;
2) The defendant’s conduct causes the plaintiff’s confinement, or the defendant fails to release the plaintiff from a confinement despite owing a duty to do so, and
3) The plaintiff is conscious of the confinement (in a majority of jurisdictions, a plaintiff who was not conscious of the confinement may still recover if harmed by the confinement).
What are the elements for intentional interference with a contract?
To establish a prima facie case for intentional interference with a contract, the plaintiff must prove that:
i) A valid contract existed between the plaintiff and a third party;
ii) The defendant knew of the contractual relationship;
iii) The defendant intentionally interfered with the contract, causing a breach; and
iv) The breach caused damages to the plaintiff.
When is NIED recovery for plaintiffs outside the zone of danger is allowed?
NIED recovery for plaintiffs outside the zone of danger is allowed if the plaintiff:
i) is closely related to the person injured by the defendant
ii) was present at the scene of the injury; and
iii) personally observed (or otherwise perceived) the injury.
What test is generally applied to determine whether a defendant’s conduct was the actual cause of the plaintiff’s harm?
“But for” test: If the plaintiff’s injury would not have occurred but for the defendant’s tortious conduct, then the defendant’s conduct is a factual cause of the harm.
When may a private actor make an arrest?
In most jurisdictions, a private actor is privileged to use force (e.g., commit a battery or false imprisonment tort) to make an arrest in the case of a felony if the felony has in fact been committed and the arresting party has reasonable grounds to suspect that the person being arrested committed it.
What are the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)?
1) The defendant’s intentional or reckless,
2) Extreme and outrageous conduct,
3) That causes,
4) The plaintiff severe emotional distress.
What defenses are available to a defamation action?
1) Truth is a complete defense.
2) Consent is a defense, provided the scope of the consent is not exceeded.
3) Absolute privileges exist for statements made:
- In the course of judicial proceedings by the participants to the proceeding or legislative proceedings by witnesses to the proceedings;
- Between spouses concerning a third person; and
- As required publications by radio, television, or newspaper.
4) Qualified (conditional) privileges exist for statements:
- Made in the interest of the publisher (defendant), such as defending his reputation;
- Made in the interest of the recipient of the statement or a third party; or
- Affecting an important public interest.
In negligence actions, what is the general standard of care?
The general standard of care imposed is that of a that of a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances. The standard is an objective one. Under this standard, the defendant is presumed to have average mental abilities and the same knowledge as an average member of the community, but a defendant’s particular physical characteristics (e.g., blindness) are taken into account.
In negligence actions, what is the standard of care for those who possess special skills or knowledge?
If a defendant possesses special skills or knowledge, she is held to a higher standard, i.e., she must exercise her superior competence with reasonable attention and care.
What is the majority rule for proximate cause?
A defendant is liable for reasonably foreseeable consequences resulting from his conduct. In addition, the type of harm must be foreseeable, although the extent of harm does not need to be foreseeable. A defendant’s liability is limited to those harms that result from the risks that made the defendant’s conduct tortious, within the scope of liability of the defendant’s conduct.
When is use of force in defending others justified?
One may defend another with force upon a reasonable belief that the circumstances are such that the third person has a privilege of self-defense against the plaintiff and the defendant’s intervention is immediately necessary for the protection of the third person. The third person need not be related to the defendant but may instead be a stranger.
When does an intervening event (an act or event occurring after the defendant’s tortious act and before the plaintiff’s injury) cut off a defendant’s liability?
An intervening event that breaks the chain of proximate causation between the defendant’s tortious act and the plaintiff’s harm is a superseding cause. An unforeseeable intervening event is generally treated as a superseding cause, while a foreseeable intervening event generally is not.
When will a defendant’s actions be considered intentional?
The defendant acts intentionally if:
i) The defendant acts with the purpose of causing the consequences of that act; or
ii) The defendant acts knowing that the consequence is substantially certain to result.
What are the elements of battery?
1) The defendant intends to cause a contact with the plaintiff
2) His affirmative conduct causes such a contact, and
3) The contact causes bodily harm or is offensive to the plaintiff.
What does it mean to be “confined within a limited area” for the purposes of false imprisonment?
The plaintiff must be confined within a limited area in which the plaintiff’s freedom of movement in all directions is constrained. The limited area may be large and need not be stationary. A plaintiff may also be confined when compelled to move in a highly restricted way.
Note: An area is not bounded if there is a reasonable means of safe escape of which the plaintiff is aware.
What are two ways in which assault differs from battery?
1) Bodily contact is not required for assault.
2) The plaintiff must be aware of or have knowledge of the defendant’s act or threat for assault.
When is the use of deadly force justified in self-defense?
The defendant may use deadly force only if the defendant reasonably believes that:
i) The plaintiff is intentionally inflicting or about to intentionally inflict unprivileged force upon the defendant;
ii) The defendant is thereby put in peril of either death, serious bodily harm, or rape by the use or threat of physical force or restraint; and
iii) The defendant can safely prevent the peril only by the immediate use of deadly force.
What is the most important thing a plaintiff must prove to be awarded damages in a negligence action?
The plaintiff must prove actual physical harm (bodily harm, property damage) to be entitled to damages for negligence. Nominal damages are not available.
What is the definition of a public nuisance?
A public nuisance is an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public.
Note: A private citizen has a claim for public nuisance only if that citizen suffers harm that is different in kind from that suffered by members of the general public.
When is the owner of a domestic animal strictly liable for harm done by the animal?
A domestic animal’s owner is strictly liable for injuries caused by that animal if he knows or has reason to know of the animal’s dangerous propensities, and the harm results from those dangerous propensities.
When may someone use force to defend property?
A person may use reasonable force to defend her property if:
i) The intrusion is not privileged;
ii) The defendant reasonably believes that:
a) The plaintiff is intruding or imminently will intrude on the defendant’s property; and
b) The intrusion can be prevented or terminated only by the means used;
iii) The defendant first asks the plaintiff to desist, and the plaintiff disregards the request or the defendant reasonably believes that a request will be useless or dangerous or that substantial harm will be done before the request can be made;
iv) The means used are reasonably proportionate to the value of the interest the defendant is protecting; and
v) The means used are not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury.
Who may be a defendant in a strict products liability action?
The defendant must be in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products of the type that harmed the plaintiff, which includes the manufacturer of the product, its distributor, and its retail seller.
Note: If the seller is a commercial supplier of the product, the seller is subject to strict liability for a defective product, even if the revenue from sales of the product is not a significant portion of its business. The seller is generally strictly liable even if the seller was not responsible for the defect in any way and even when the product is not purchased directly from the seller.
What are the elements of defamation?
A plaintiff may bring an action for defamation if:
i) The defendant’s defamatory language;
ii) Is of or concerning the plaintiff;
iii) Is published to a third party who understands its defamatory nature; and
iv) It damages the plaintiff’s reputation.
For matters of public concern, the plaintiff is constitutionally required to prove fault on the part of the defendant. If the plaintiff is either a public official or a public figure, then the plaintiff must prove actual malice.
If either (i) the defamatory statement relates to a matter of public concern or (ii) the plaintiff is a public official or a public figure, then the plaintiff must also prove that the defamatory statement is false.
What are two major forms of comparative negligence?
(1) pure comparative negligence
(2) partial (modified) comparative negligence
What is pure comparative negligence?
The plaintiff’s full damages are calculated by the trier of fact and then reduced by the proportion that the plaintiff’s fault bears to the total harm.
What is partial (modified) comparative negligence?
(i) If the plaintiff is less at fault than the defendant, the plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by his percentage of fault, just as in a pure comparative-fault jurisdiction;
(ii) If the plaintiff is more at fault than the defendant, the plaintiff’s recovery is barred, just as in a contributory-negligence jurisdiction;
(iii) In the vast majority of modified comparative-fault jurisdictions, if the plaintiff and the defendant are found to be equally at fault, the plaintiff recovers 50% of his total damages. In a few modified comparative-fault jurisdictions, the plaintiff recovers nothing when the plaintiff and the defendant are equally at fault.
What is the doctrine of “transferred intent?”
Transferred intent exists when a person intends to commit an intentional tort against one person but instead commits the intended tort against a different person.
When is an employer vicariously liable for an employee’s torts?
An employer is liable for the tortious conduct of an employee that is within the scope of employment. Conduct within the scope of employment includes acts that the employee is employed to perform or that are intended to profit or benefit the employer. An employer may be liable for an employee’s detour but not an employee’s frolic.
Note: Generally, an employer is not liable for the intentional tort of an employee unless such force is inherent to the job or the employee is authorized to act or speak for the employer and the position provided an opportunity for the tort.
Are words sufficient to establish a prima facie case for assault?
For assault, words alone are insufficient. However, words coupled with conduct or other circumstances may be sufficient if the plaintiff reasonably anticipates that a harmful or offensive contact is imminent.
What are Cardozo’s views regarding the foreseeability of a plaintiff?
Cardozo (majority) view - a duty of care is owed to the plaintiff only if she is a member of the class of persons who might be foreseeably harmed (sometimes called “foreseeable plaintiffs”) as a result of the defendant’s negligent conduct.
What are Andrews’ views regarding the foreseeability of a plaintiff?
Andrews (minority view) - if the defendant can foresee harm to anyone as a result of his negligence, then a duty of care is owed to everyone (foreseeable or not) harmed as a result of his breach.
When determining whether contact is offensive for the purposes of battery, what are the objective and subjective tests?
Objective test: contact is offensive when a person of ordinary sensibilities (i.e., a reasonable person) would find the contact offensive.
Subjective test: contact is offensive when the defendant knows that the contact is highly offensive to the plaintiff’s sense of personal dignity, and the defendant contacts the plaintiff with the primary purpose that the contact will be highly offensive (unless liability violates public policy.
What is the effect of an exculpatory clause in a contract under which the defendant disclaims liability for negligence?
An exculpatory clause in a contract can constitute an express assumption of the risk by the plaintiff that operates as an affirmative defense to a negligence action.
Note: Many courts now hold that disclaimer of liability by contract negates the fact that the defendant owes a duty of care to the plaintiff in the first place, causing the plaintiff’s prima facie case to fail, rather than operating as an affirmative defense.
In what situations will exculpatory clausesnot be enforced?
Courts will not enforce exculpatory provisions:
i) Disclaiming liability for reckless or wanton misconduct or gross negligence;
ii) When there is a gross disparity of bargaining power between the parties;
iii) When the party seeking to apply the exculpatory provision offers services of great importance to the public that are a practical necessity for some members of the public such as medical services;
iv) If the exculpatory clause is subject to typical contractual defenses such as fraud or duress; or
v) When it is against public policy to enforce agreements that insulate people from the consequences of their own negligence.
What is the effect of a plaintiff’s negligence on a strict products liability action?
In most comparative-fault jurisdictions, the plaintiff’s own negligence reduces his recovery in a strict-products-liability action in the same manner as in a negligence action. In those jurisdictions, a plaintiff’s conduct that amounts to an “assumption of the risk” is treated as comparative negligence in order to reduce, but not eliminate, recovery.
Note: In some comparative-fault jurisdictions, the plaintiff’s recovery in strict products liability is not reduced by the percentage that the plaintiff’s fault contributed to causing her injury.
When is a product defective?
A product is defective when, at the time of the sale or distribution, it contains a:
1) manufacturing defect;
2) design defect; or
3) failure-to-warn defect
What is a manufacturing defect?
A deviation from what the manufacturer intended the product to be that causes harm to the plaintiff (the test is whether the product conforms to the defendant’s product specifications)
What is a design defect?
A defect in the design of the product as determined under the consumer expectation test (unreasonably dangerous beyond the expectation of an ordinary user) and/or the risk-utility test (a reasonable alternative design that was economically feasible was available to the defendant and the failure to use that design rendered the product not reasonably safe)
What is a failure-to-warn defect?
There is a foreseeable risk of harm, not obvious to an ordinary user of the product, which risk could have been reduced or avoided by providing reasonable instructions or warnings, rendering the product not reasonably safe.
What is the firefighter’s rule?
An emergency professional, such as a police officer or firefighter, is barred from recovering damages from the party whose negligence caused the professional’s injury if the injury results from a risk inherent in the job.