Torts Flashcards
A plaintiff must prove what to prevail on an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim
she suffered severe emotional distress as a result of the defendant’s conduct, that the defendant intended to cause severe emotional distress, or acted with recklessness as to the risk of causing such distress, and that the defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous.
If in self defense, a person accidentially injures a third party are they liable for the harm?
No, as long as the harm was not deliberate or negligent with respect to the third party.
Public nuisance requires what?
A special injury different than that suffered by the general public.
For an attractive nuisance claim, the landowner must
know or have reason to know that the artificial condition is located in a place children are likely to trespass (not retirement communities)
In what type of fault jurisdiction is assumption of risk not recognized as a separate offense?
Comparative negligence jurisdiction
What does assumption of risk do in a comparative negligence jurisdiction?
It merely merges into the comparative fault analysis and merely reduces recovery.
What is a private nuisance?
A substantial and unreasonable interference with another individual’s use or enjoyment of land.
What kind of interference is required for a private nuisance?
The interference must be intentional, negligent, reckless, or the result of abnormally dangerous conduct to constitute nuisance, and it must be offensive, inconvenient or annoying to a normal, reasonable person in the community.
What is the character of a customer for premises liability purposes?
Invitee.
What duty is owed to invitees?
A reasonable care to inspect property and to protect the invitee from unreasonably dangerous conditions.
When is the invitee duty usually met?
When there is a warning sign and a lock.
In a traditional negligence jurisdiction, how can a plaintiff mitigate his own negligence?
Proving that the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid injuring the plaintiff but failed to due so.
What are the limits to the breach of implied warranty of merchantability?
Limiting consequential damages is permitted, but the limitation of such damages for personal injury in the case of consumer goods is prima facie unconscionable.
In a products liability action, will a limitation of consequential damages by product seller or other distributor bar or reduce an otherwise valid products liability claim for personal injury?
No.
