Torts Flashcards
Under the traditional standard for res ipsa loquitur, negligence is inferred if
(1) the plaintiff’s harm would not normally occur unless someone was negligent,
(2) the defendant had EXCLUSIVE control over the thing that caused the harm, and
(3) the plaintiff did nothing to cause the harm / there are NO OTHER alternative causes
Under the modern approach, common carriers only owe a duty to use
reasonable care to protect passengers from harm that arises within the scope of that relationship
Product liability is imposed on any commercial seller in the chain of distribution if
(1) the commercial seller’s product contained a defect (manufacturing / design / warranty)
(2) the defect existed when it left the commercial seller’s control, and
(3) the defect caused the plaintiff’s harm when used in an intended or foreseeable way
The owner of a wild animal is strictly liable for harm that is caused by
(1) a plaintiff’s fearful reaction to the sight of an unrestrained wild animal, or
(2) directly results from the wild animal’s abnormally dangerous characteristics
A plaintiff who is a public figure or official can recover for defamation only if
the plaintiff proves that he defendant made a false statement about the plaintiff with actual malice (e.g. with knowledge or reckless disregard of the statement’s falsity)
Under the common law, assumption of the risk is a complete defense to negligence when
the plaintiff voluntarily accepts (appreciates) a known risk of harm (knows what the danger is / why the action is dangerous)
Where multiple forces combined to cause the plaintiff’s harm and any one alone would have been sufficient to cause the harm, the test for actual causation is
whether the defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the harm
Substantial factor is a substitute for but-for when multiple D’s are negligent
Products liability claims can be brought against commercial suppliers or commercial sellers but not against
service providers
In most jurisdictions, an innkeeper owes a duty to use
ordinary care to protect its guests while they are on the premises
(evidence that the innkeeper complied with, or deviated from, community or industry custom is relevant to but not conclusive on the issue of negligence)
Once negligence per se is established as a defense, the defendant must still prove
that the plaintiff’s violation of the statute caused the plaintiff’s harm
The modern trend for applying res ipsa loquitur is to
ignore the exclusivity requirement when applying the traditional standard for res ipsa loquitur in negligence actions involving products liability
A defendant who has permission to use the plaintiff’s chattel commits conversion when they
(1) intentionally use the chattel in a way that exceeds the scope of permission, and
(2) seriously violate the plaintiff’s right to control the chattel
D liability is set at the FMV of the chattel at the time of conversion
What are torts subject to transferred intent?
Battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass
What are the 6 circumstances which give rise to a duty to act?
(1) Assumption of duty
(2) Placing another in peril
(3) Contract
(4) Authority
(5) Special relationship
(6) Statutory obligation
Elements of negligence
(1) Duty
(2) Breach
(3) Causation
(4) Damages
Majority rule of proximate cause is
D is liable for reasonably foreseeable consequences resulting from their conduct (type of harm but not extent of harm)
Defenses to defamation
(1) Truth
(2) Consent
(3) Absolute privileges (judicial proceedings, spouses, required publication)
(4) Qualified privileges
Elements of strict product liability
(1) Defective product
(2) Defective when it left D’s control, and
(3) Defect caused P’s injury when used in reasonably foreseeable way
What is a private nuisance
Thing or activity that substantially and unreasonably interferes with another individual’s use and enjoyment of their land (standard: normal person in the community)
Note: statutory or regulatory compliance / “coming to the nuisance” may be admitted as evidence but is not dispositive
Note: even if plaintiff is personally not bothered by it, nuisance may still be substantial and intolerable
Legal duty owed to an unknown trespasser
Refrain from willful, wanton, reckless or intentional misconduct (does not apply to undiscovered trespassers)
Legal duty owed to a licensee (e.g. social guest)
Duty to either correct or warn of concealed dangers known to land possessor or should be obvious to possessor (no duty to inspect for dangers)
Legal duty owed to an invitee
Duty of reasonably care, including reasonable care to inspect property, discover unreasonably dangerous conditions and protect invitee from them (does not extend beyond the scope of invitation - makes invitee a trespasser)
What is considered extreme and outrageous for purposes of IIED
Exceeds the possible limits of human decency so as to be entirely intolerable in a civilized society
What must a 3rd party prove under a bystander theory of IIED
(1) D intentionally or recklessly (malice) engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct that emotionally or physically harmed a close family member
(2) D knows 3rd party is close family member
(3) P contemporaneously perceived (saw, heard) the conduct and suffered emotional distress
Define trespass
intentional act causing a physical invasion of the land of another
Types of damage available in strict liability cases
Personal injury or property damage (purely economic loss must be brought under breach of warranty)
Bystander Recovery for NIED
(1) Defendant negligently injured plaintiff’s close relative / friend
(2) Plaintiff contemporaneously perceived event
(3) Event caused serious emotional distress
Most important thing plaintiff must prove in a negligence action
Actual physical harm (bodily harm, property harm).
Nominal damages are not available (are only for intentional torts)
What level of force may be used to obtain taken property?
Generally there is no privilege to commit battery, assault, or false imprisonment to regain possession of personal property (exception: fresh pursuit - allows reasonable, non-deadly force)
Elements of assault
(1) Plaintiff’s reasonable apprehension
(2) Of imminent harmful or offensive bodily contact
(3) Caused by defendant’s action or threat
(4) With the intent to cause either the apprehension of such contact or the contact itself
Elements of battery
(1) Defendant’s intent to cause contact with plaintiff
(2) Affirmative conduct causes such a contact
(3) Contact causes bodily harm or is offensive to the plaintiff
Note: engaging in action “substantially certain” to result in contact (e.g. pulling chair out from under someone) can satisfy intent for battery
Note: Intent to commit Assault can transfer intent to Battery (and vice versa)
Single-intent rule: Only need to intend contact, not harmfulness of contact to satisfy
When may force be used to defend property?
(1) Intrusion is not privileged
(2) Defendant reasonably believes plaintiff is intruding or will imminently intrude and can only be prevented or terminated by the means used
(3) Defendant first asks plaintiff to desist or believes such action will be useless
(4) Means used are reasonably proportional to the value of the interest being protected
(5) Means are not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm
Elements for intentional misrepresentation
(1) Defendant misrepresented a material fact, opinion, intention, or law or failed to disclose a material fact when under an affirmative obligation to do so
(2) Defendant knew representation to be false or acted with reckless disregard to truthfulness
(3) Defendant intended to induce the plaintiff to act (or refrain from acting) in reliance on the misrepresentation
(4) Plaintiff actually relied on misrepresentation
(5) Reliance was justified
(6) Plaintiff can prove actual damages
When may a private actor use force to make an arrest
(1) The felony has in fact been committed, and
(2) The arresting party has reasonable grounds to suspect that the person being arrested committed it
Elements for intentional interference with a contract
(1) Valid K existed between plaintiff and third party
(2) Defendant knew of the contractual relationship
(3) Defendant intentionally interfered with the K causing breach
(4) Breach caused damages to Plaintiff (any damage sufficient)
General standard of care in negligence actions
Reasonably prudent person under the circumstances (objective)
Note: Physical characteristics (e.g. blindness) are considered but mental abilities are not
4 invasion of privacy torts
(1) Misappropriation of right to publicity (unauthorized use of P’s name, likeness, or identity for commercial benefit)
(2) Intrusion upon seclusion (intrusion into P’s private affairs and objectionable to reasonable person)
(3) Placing plaintiff in a false light (published false facts which place plaintiff in a false light and are highly offensive to reasonable person)
(4) Public disclosure of (true) private facts (highly offensive to reasonable person and not of legitimate public concern)
Elements of false imprisonment
(1) D intends to confine or restrain plaintiff within a limited area
(2) Defendant’s conduct causes plaintiff’s confinement (or fails to release plaintiff)
(3) Plaintiff is conscious in confinement (minority jx allow recovery if not conscious but otherwise harmed)
Elements of defamation
(1) Defamatory language (false, negative statement)
(2) Of or concerning the plaintiff
(3) Published to a third party who understands its defamatory nature
(4) Damages plaintiff’s reputation*
If the matter is of public concern, or the plaintiff is a public figure/public official, must prove falsity and actual malice
Note: “Published” need not be literal (i.e. published in a newspaper - simply telling a 3rd party is sufficient)
*Standard for assessing harm to plaintiff’s reputation is whether a “third party’s reasonable interpretation” would find it so
In negligence action, when are damages for economic loss allowed
when the plaintiff has also proven non-economic (physical) injury
An activity is abnormally dangerous when
(1) It involves a high risk of harm
(2) It is not commonly found in the community, and
(3) Involves a risk that cannot be eliminated with due care
Look for: blasting, explosions, toxicity (NOT fireworks)
What makes a design defective?
(1) Manufacturing defect (came out more dangerous than intended)
(2) Design defect
(3) Failure to warn (warranty defect)
Two tests for design defect
(1) Consumer exception test (dangerous beyond exception of ordinary consumer)
(2) Risk utility test (reasonable alternative design that is economically feasible was available and failure to use that design rendered product unreasonably dangerous)
If a plaintiff cannot show strict liability may they bring a negligence claim?
Yes
How do damages differ in libel and slander
Libel - general damages are presumed
Slander - damages are not presumed (absent slander per se)
What is slander per se?
Damages are presumed when statements involve:
(1) Professional reputation
(2) Disease
(3) Crimes of moral turpitude
(4) Unchaste behavior
Shopkeeper’s privilege
May detain plaintiff for (1) reasonable amount of time and in a (2) reasonable manner if there is reasonable suspicion of plaintiff having shoplifted / stole
Abatement of a nuisance
Private nuisance: Reasonable force is permitted to abate nuisance. P must give notice of nuisance to D and D refuse to act prior to action being taken
Public nuisance: Only public authority may abate public nuisance
Implied warranty of merchantability warrants that the product being sold is
generally acceptable and reasonably fit for the ordinary purposes for which it is being sold
Under the market share liability doctrine, a plaintiff can
recover based on each defendant’s share of the market, so long as the plaintiff’s injuries are caused by a fungible product and it is impossible to identify which defendant placed the harmful product into the market