Torts Flashcards
What defenses can’t be used for intentional torts?
Incapacity
(insane, intoxicated, infancy, etc.)
Intentional Torts?
Assault,
Battery,
False imprisonment,
IIED
Trespass
Conversion
Limitations on use of transferred intent
Only if both the tort intended and the tort that results are one of the following
- assault
- battery
- false imprisonment
- trespass to land/chattels
Battery
- Harmful or offensive contact
-Offensive to a reasonable person
-Can be direct/indirect - Contact must be with the plaintiff’s person
Can recover nominal damages even if actual damages are not proved
Assault
(i) an act by defendant causing a reasonable apprehension in plaintiff of immediate harmful or offensive contact to plaintiff’s person,
(ii) intent by defendant to bring about in plaintiff apprehension of that contact, and
(iii) causation.
-fear not required
-must have been aware
-D must have the apparent ability to commit a battery
2. Of an immediate battery
Can recover nominal damages even if actual damages are not proved
Nominal damages
Nominal damages are a small amount of money awarded to a plaintiff in a civil case to recognize that their legal rights were violated, but they did not suffer significant financial harm. They are symbolic and are meant to show that the plaintiff was right, rather than to compensate them for their losses
False imprisonment
- Act of restraint
-failure to act if legal duty to do so can be restraint (leaving handicapped person on airplane) - Plaintiff confined in bounded area
-No reasonable means of escape known to the plaintiff
-Plaintiff must know of the confinement or be harmed by it
-Hypersensitivity of P is ignored
Insufficient acts of restraint include:
moral pressure
future threats
IIED
- Extreme and outrageous conduct
-continuous in nature
-committed by a certain type of defendant OR
-directed towards a certain type of plaintiff (children, elderly persons, etc.) - P must suffer severe emotional distress
-Recklessness will satisfy intent requirement
-Actual damages are required
IIED in Bystander Cases
When it is directed at a third person and the plaintiff suffers severe emotional distress bc of it the plaintiff can recover by showing either IIED elements or that
- they were present when the injury occurred
- distress resulted in bodily harm OR close relative and
- D knew these facts
Trespass to Land
- physical invasion
-can be throwing something onto the land
-if its intangible like a smell then its nuisance NOT trespass - of the plaintiff’s REAL PROPERTY
-airspace, belongs to the person w/ the right to possess the property not necessarily the owner - Defendant needs intent only to enter, doesn’t need to know that the land belongs to someone else
-Damages can be recovered w/o showing actual injury to the land
Trespass to Chattels
Act by the defendant that interferes with the plaintiff’s right of possession in a chattel
-directly damaging the chattel (intermeddling) OR
-depriving P of their lawful right of possession of chattel (dispossession)
-intent to do the act of interference is all thats needed. Mistake is not an excuse
-actual damages required
Conversion
Wrongful acquisition (theft), wrongful transfer, wrongful detention, and substantially changing, severely, damaging, or misusing a chattel
-intent required
-seriousness of interference (longer the withholding period will be conversion, a short time might just be trespass to chattels)
-only tangible personal property
-damages (fair market value) or possession (replevin)
Defenses to intentional torts
- Consent
- Self-defense of self and others and property
- Necessity (public v. private)
Consent
- defense to ALL intentional torts
- Plaintiff must have legal capacity to consent (limited capacity can consent to part of something)
- Express v. Implied consent
-Implied consent is by a reasonable person standard
-no fraud/duress
-exceeding consent given
-implied consent (custom and usage)
Protective privileges
defense of self, property, or others
- Is the privilege available? Only for preventing the commission of a tort. Already committed torts don’t qualify
- Is a mistake permissible as to whether the tort being defended against is actually being committed
- Was a proper amount of force used?
Self Defense
When a person reasonably believes that they are being or are about to be attacked, may use reasonably necessary force to protect against injury
Majority Rule: no duty to retreat BUT modern trend imposes a duty to retreat before using deadly force unless actor is in their home
Not available to initial aggressor unless other party responds to non-deadly force by using deadly force
Can be liable to a third person if they deliberately injure the third person in trying to protect themselves
Reasonable mistake is allowed
Self defense of others
-When they reasonably believe that the other person could have used force to defend themselves
-reasonable mistake is allowed and proportionate force
Defense of property
Against their real/personal property
- request to stop or leave must be first unless it would be clearly futile or dangerous
- not once tort has been committed, but can use force in HOT PURSUIT
- Proportionate force
- Mistake allowed
5.When another’s possession of the owner’s chattel began lawfully, the owner may use only peaceful means to recover the chattel.
Shoplifting detentions
Falls under defense category
Shopkeeper may detain a suspected shoplifter but:
- Must be a reasonable belief
- Must be conducted in a reasonable manner with NO deadly force
- Must be only for a reasonable period of time and only for the purpose of making an investigation
Reentry of Land
CL: one can use force to reenter land when an intruder came into possession tortiously
Modern Law: NO SELF HELP
Necessity defense
ONLY FOR PROPERTY TORTS
-If its someone else’s chattel then a person can interfere if its reasonable and apparently necessary in an emergency to avoid injury
Two types:
- Public necessity: can do so if they acted to avert an IMMINENT PUBLIC DISASTER
- When action was to prevent serious harm to a limited number of people. Actor must pay for any injury they cause
Negligence
Not an intentional tort; standard of care is REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON
- Duty to conform to a specific standard of conduct
- Breach of that duty
- Beach is the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury
- Damages
-there is an exception to ppl w/ superior skill or knowledge, they are held to a higher standard
Who is duty owed to for negligence?
- Only to foreseeable plaintiffs within the zone of danger
-Rescuers
-Intended beneficiaries of economic transactions
Firefighters Rule
a professional rescuer injured in the performance of his professional duties “assumes the risk” of such injury and is not entitled to damages.
Special negligence duties for children
held to standard of child with the same age, intelligence and experience.
subjective test
under give is usually w/o capacity to be negligent
kids engaged in potentially dangerous adult activities may be required to conform to an adult standard of care
Special negligence duties for doctor
- duty to disclose risks of treatments
- higher level of duty bc they are a professional
Special negligence duties for possessors of land (unknown trespassers and known trespassers)
Unknown: no duty to an UNDISCOVERED trespasser
Known: if discovered or anticipated trespassors, land possessor must warn of or make safe any conditions that are
1. artificial
2. highly dangerous
3. concealed
4. known to the land possessor in advance
Duty to Licensees in Torts
one who enters onto the land with the possessor’s permission for their own purposes or business. Typically social guests
Land possessor has duty to warn or make safe hazardous conditions that are:
1. concealed
2. known to the land possessor in advance
Must exercise reasonable care but has no duty to inspect or repair
Duty to Invitees in Torts
Invitee: on property for landowner’s business reasons
1. Owner has greater duty, must keep premises reasonably safe
-concealed conditions
-known to the land possessor in advanced or could have been discovered by a reasonable inspection
2. If they go somewhere they are not allowed, they become a trespasser
Duty owed to users of recreational land
landowner who permits gen public to use their land for recreational purposes without charging a fee is not liable for injuries suffered by rec user unless the owner willfully and maliciously failed to guard against or warn of a dangerous condition or activity
Statutory Standards of Care (What are the three)
- negligence per se (strongest)
- rebuttable presumption (medium)
- evidence of negligence (weakest)