Torts Flashcards
Negligent infliction of emotional distress
(1) D’s negligence caused risk of bodily harm to P (P must be within the zone of danger)
(2) plaintiff must suffer physical symptoms from the severe emotional distress
Bystander negligent infliction of emotional distress
bystander outside of the zone of danger who sees D injure another can recover for their own distress as long as
(1) P and the person injured are closely related, and
(2) P was present at the scene and observed / perceived the event
Attractive Nuisance
P must show:
(1) a dangerous condition on the land that the owner is or should be aware of
(2) the owner knows or should know that children might trespass on the land
(3) the condition is likely to cause injury - dangerous bc of the child’s inability to appreciate the risk
(4) the expense of remedying the situation is slight compared with the magnitude of the risk
Res Ipsa Loquitur
The very occurrence of the event shows some negligence. P must show:
(1) the accident causing the injury would not normally occur unless someone was negligent
(2) the negligence was probably attributable to D (the type of accident generally happens bc of negligence of someone in D’s position)
Battery
Harmful or offensive contract to P’s person
+ intent and causation
Assault
reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contract to P’s person
+ intent and causation
False Imprisonment
Act resulting in P’s confinement to a bounded area
+ intent and causation
Intentional infliction of emotional distress
(1) Extreme or outrageous conduct - exceeds all bounds of decency
(2) severe emotional distress
(3) intent or recklessness
+ causation and actual damages
bystander intentional infliction of emotional distress
(1) P bystander must be present when the conduct occurred
(2) the distress must result in body harm OR P is a close relative of third party, and
(3) D must know of these facts or have intent to cause P distress
trespass to chattel / conversion
intentional interference with P’s right of possession in chattel
Self-defense
reasonable belief in tortious action and reasonable (proportionate) force
factual causation
- but for test
- substantial factor test for several causes (liable if breach contributed in a substantial way to the injury)
- unascertainable causes - shifts burden to Ds to prove which D caused the harm
Last clear chance rule
an exception to contributory negligence - under this rule, the person with the last clear chance to avoid the accident but fails to do so is liable for negligence
Assumption of risk
P knew of the risk and voluntarily proceeded
abnormally dangerous activity
(1) the activity must create a risk of serious harm even when reasonable care is exercised, and
(2) the activity is not a matter of common usage in the community
liability extends to foreseeable plaintiffs and the harm must result from the kind of danger anticipated from the dangerous activity
products liability
(1) D is a commercial supplier
(2) product is defective and unreasonably dangerous when placed in the stream of commerce
(3) product was the actual and proximate cause of P’s injuries
(4) P used the product in a foreseeable manner
Nuisance
intentional invasion of property rights > substantial and / or unreasonable interference
- private - use and enjoyment of the land
- public - health, safety, etc of community
- defenses - came to the nuisance
intentional interference with business relation
(1) valid K or business expectancy
(2) D knows and interferes
(3) interference causes breach or termination of K,
(4) damages
Privacy claims
- appropriation
- false light - widespread publication of falsehood about P that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person
- intrusion upon seclusion - P has a REoP and the intrusion is high offensive to a reasonable person
- disclosure - of info highly offensive to a reasonable person
Defamation
(1) false defamatory statement concerning P
(2) publication - made to a third party
(3) harmful to P’s reputation (if public figure / concern, must prove falsity and malice)
(4) damages
- libel and slander per se - actual damages
slander - specific economic loss
intent for intentional torts
D acts with the desire to produce the legally forbidden consequence
Negligence - duty
whenever a person engages in an activity, he is under legal duty to act as a reasonably prudent person would under the circumstances. if the D creates un unreasonable risk of injury to persons in the position of the P, the general duty of care extends from the D to P
