Torts Flashcards
TEST TIPS
test frequency
[ overview ]
25 MBE Qs
50% MEE test frequency
THE BASICS
3 types of torts
[ overview ]
- Intentional (including malice and deception)
- Negligence
- Strict liability torts
THE BASICS
3-step analysis
[ overview ]
- Prima facie elements of each tort and how to apply them
- Defenses available for each tort and how to apply them
- Who may held liable and in what amount
THE BASICS
7 intentional torts
[ intentional torts ]
- battery
- assault
- False imprisonment
- IIED
- Trespass to land
- Trespass to chattels
- Conversion
THE BASICS
4 torts against the person
[ intentional torts ]
- battery
- assault
- False imprisonment
- IIED
THE BASICS
3 torts against property
[ intentional torts ]
- Trespass to land
- Trespass to chattels
- Conversion
THE BASICS
who may commit an intention tort?
[ intentional torts ]
Anyone, regardless of age, experience, or intelligence (this is why insanity and intoxication aren’t defenses to intentional torts)
THE BASICS
insanity as defense to intentional torts
»
[ intentional torts ]
TRICK. It’s not, nope.
THE BASICS
intoxication as defense to intentional torts
[ intentional torts ]
DOUBLE TRICK, TRICK UR FACE OFF. It’s not, nope.
THE BASICS
in determining whether D’s actions are offensive for purposes of battery, assault, or IIED, does court consider P’s super-sensitivity?
[ intentional torts ]
No, P is treated like an average person, UNLESS D ACTUALLY KNOWS of P’s sensitivity
THE BASICS
are Ps required to prove damages for intentional torts?
[ intentional torts ]
No, nominal damages are presumed, except for IIED and trespass to chattels
THE BASICS
will an award of nominal damages support a punitive damages award?
[ intentional torts ]
YES
punitive damages may be awarded for intentional torts if D acts MALICIOUSLY
PRIMA FACIE ELEMENTS
4 key elements
[ intentional torts ]
1. TORTIOUS ACT by D (which includes any WILLED MUSCULAR MOVEMENT, but does NOT INCLUDE - sleepwalking - convulsions - reflexes - hypnosis - being physically forced by another person)
- SPECIFIC OR GENERAL INTENT by D to commit the act
(satisfied if D
- acts with purpose of producing the consequence OR
- acts knowing consequence is substantially certain to occur) - CAUSATION
(similar to negligence, except courts take a broader view of proximate cause) - DAMAGES
(required for IIED and TTC)
PRIMA FACIE ELEMENTS
liability for failure to act (aka omission)
» general rule + 4 exceptions
[ intentional torts ]
Exceptions = may be a duty to act if
- SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP btwn injured person and D
(ex = family member, employer-employee, principal-agent, owner/occupier-invitee, common carrier-passenger, innkeeper-guest, driver-passenger, school-student) - D CAUSED THE PERIL (innocently or negligently) and then did not help
- D UNDERTOOK TO RESCUE person and then quit which precluded others from attempting rescue or left P in worse condition
- TARASOFF WARNING (majority approach)
= mental-health professional has a duty to warn the victim if patient makes specific threats regarding an identifiable victim
PRIMA FACIE ELEMENTS
transferred intent doctrine
[ intentional torts ]
intent to commit one tort may be transferred to ANOTHER TORT
an intent to commit a tort against one person may be transferred to ANOTHER PERSON
PRIMA FACIE ELEMENTS
use of transferred intent doctrine
[ intentional torts ]
may be used only where BOTH intended tort and committed tort are one of following:
- battery
- assault
- false imprisonment
- trespass to land
- trespass to chattels
BATTERY
4 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- D acts intending to bring about or with substantial certainty of
- harmful contact or offensive contact (direct or indirect) with P
- causation
- lack of consent (majority view)
BATTERY
examples of harmful contact
[ intentional torts ]
injury, pain, or disfigurement
BATTERY
standard for whether contact is harmful or offensive
[ intentional torts ]
as judged by a reasonable person
ASSAULT
3 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- D acts intending to (or with substantial certainty that it will occur)
- cause a reasonable expectation
- of an immediate battery to P
ASSAULT
merger
[ intentional torts ]
NOPE, assault and battery do NOT merge under tort law
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
confinement/restraint
» 3 key examples of
[ intentional torts ]
confinement or restraint may be by:
- physical barriers (locked room, cage, cell)
- physical force
- threats of immediate force to P, P’s family (not 3Ps), or P’s property (purse or car)
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
confinement/restraint
» omission as
[ intentional torts ]
if D owes P a duty (or they have a prior understanding) to release P, an omission may constitute false imprisonment
(ex = jailor must release a prisoner at the end of his sentence)
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
confinement/restraint
» length of
[ intentional torts ]
a confinement for one minute may constitute false imprisonment, but P must be AWARE of confinement (or, if unaware, must be INJURED by confinement)
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
bounded area
[ intentional torts ]
area that is bounded on all sides from which there is no reasonable and known means of escape
NOTE = P is under no duty to search for an exit and is not required to use a dangerous or humiliating exit
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
damages
[ intentional torts ]
P may recover damages for the confinement and for injuries incurred in reasonable attempts to escape
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
3 defenses
[ intentional torts ]
- Shopkeeper’s defense
- False arrest defense for police
- False arrest defense for private citizens
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
defenses
» shopkeeper’s defense
[ intentional torts ]
available if the shopkeeper
- reasonably believes that a theft has occurred;
- the manner of the detention and the force used are reasonable; and
- the period of confinement is reasonable (minutes, but not hours)
ALSO applies to assault and/or battery claims against shopkeepers
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
defenses
» false arrest defense for police
[ intentional torts ]
a police officer has a defense to false imprisonment if
- the arrest is made pursuant to a valid warrant OR
- the arrest is for a felony and the officer reasonably believes that the felony occurred and that the plaintiff committed it OR
- the arrest is for a misdemeanor (that resulted in a breach of the peace) committed in the officer’s presence
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
defenses
» false arrest defense for private citizens
[ intentional torts ]
a private citizen has a defense if
- the arrest is for a felony, the felony in fact occurred, and the citizen reasonably believes that the plaintiff committed it OR
- the arrest is for a misdemeanor (that resulted in a breach of the peace) committed in the citizen’s presence
IIED
3 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- Extreme and outrageous conduct by D
- Intentionally designed to inflict distress or reckless (i.e., a deliberate disregard of a high probability of emotional distress)
- P suffers severe emotional distress
(no physical injury or physical consequences are required)
IIED
definition of extreme/outrageous conduct
[ intentional torts ]
conduct that exceeds all bounds of decency tolerated in a civilized society
IIED
examples of extreme/outrageous conduct
[ intentional torts ]
physical threats, heavy-handed collection efforts, willful mishandling of corpses, cruel practical jokes
words, insults, or offensive language are generally insufficient
BUT non-outrageous conduct may become outrageous if
- it is frequently repeated or done in public
- P is a child, elderly person, pregnant woman, or someone the defendant knows is sensitive
- D is an inn-keeper or common carrier (bus, train, airplane) AND P is a guest or passenger (in such cases, even gross insults suffice)
IIED
examples of severe emotional distress
[ intentional torts ]
neurosis, psychosis, chronic depression, phobia, or any other type of severe and disabling emotional or mental condition that is recognized and diagnosed by professionals
IIED
essay point
[ intentional torts ]
For behavior that “nearly misses” qualifying as an assault, false imprisonment, defamation, or invasion of privacy, IIED is often used as a FALL-BACK TORT on essay questions
IIED
defense
[ intentional torts ]
In rare cases (Falwell?!), the First Amendment may be a defense to IIED
IIED
can P recover for IIED or NIED as a result of D’s physical harm of another?
[ intentional torts ]
yes, under TWO circumstances
- if D injured the other person for the purpose of causing P emotional distress (= IIED)
- If P and the injured person are close relatives AND P was present at the scene of the injury AND P personally observed the event (= IIED or NIED)
- in some cases, P must also prove that D knew P was present or acted with reckless disregard to P’s presence
- In addition, some states allow recovery by persons who are not close relatives, but only if that person suffers physical consequences (like a heart attack) from the distress
NOTE that these actions are DERIVATIVE = if the injured party was at fault, P may not recover (or may not recover the full amount of her damages)
TRESPASS TO LAND
3 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- D acts intending to (or with substantial certainty that it will occur)
- enter
- P’s land (including surface and usable space above/below)
TRESPASS TO LAND
intent required
[ intentional torts ]
the intent required is simply the intent to ENTER the land
there is NO requirement to show intent to trespass or wrongfully enter the land
TRESPASS TO LAND
3 ways to satisfy element of entry
[ intentional torts ]
- D enters the land or wrongfully stays (or allows an item to stay) on the land
- D pushes or chases another on to the land
- D causes an object heavier than air to enter or cross the land (smoke, noise, shockwaves, and sound are insufficient but don’t be sad—see nuisance)
TRESPASS TO LAND
who may assert trespass actions?
[ intentional torts ]
may be asserted by owners or occupiers (ex = tenants) or even adverse possessors
TRESPASS TO LAND
damages
[ intentional torts ]
Proof of actual damages is not required because nominal damages are presumed
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
4 elements
[ intentional torts ]
x
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
4 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- D acts intending to
(or with substantial certainty that it will occur)
- intent required is the intent to do the act, not the intent to damage or dispossess or steal - interfere with or damage P’s personal property
- applies to tangible property only, not land or services - causation
- damages
(dispossession or injury)
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
mistake of ownership
[ intentional torts ]
Nope, not a defense
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
interference/damage required
[ intentional torts ]
D’s wrongful possession or damage suffices
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
who may assert claims for trespass to chattels and conversion?
[ intentional torts ]
may be asserted by
• owners
• lessees
• even adverse possessors of the property
BUT may NOT be asserted by thieves
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
measurement of damages
[ intentional torts ]
= fair rental value for any dispossession period OR the cost of repair
NOTE = this tort requires proof of ACTUAL damages
CONVERSION
4 elements
[ intentional torts ]
- D acts intending to
(or with substantial certainty that it will occur) - Seriously interfere with or damage P’s personal property
- applies to tangible property only, not land or services - causation
- damages
(dispossession or injury)
aka SAME as trespass to chattels EXCEPT conversion applies if the interference or damage to personal property is SERIOUS
CONVERSION
damages
[ intentional torts ]
forced sale (D must pay the FMV of the property at time of conversion)
P may also elect replevin, plus damages for dispossession
Idk why this has to be said, but kinsler put it under damages?
- if D borrows personal property without permission and the property is seriously damaged or destroyed (even if damage was caused by 3P), this is conversion
CONVERSION
difference btwn conversion and TTC
[ intentional torts ]
a question of DEGREE
the GREATER D’s bad faith
= the MORE LIKELY it will be conversion
DEFENSES
6 defenses
[ intentional torts ]
- Consent
- Self-defense
- Defense of others
- Defense of property
- Public necessity
- Private necessity
DEFENSES
consent
» how may consent be given?
[ intentional torts ]
May be express = by words
- ex = “you may park on my land”
May be implied = by conduct or custom
- ex = participant in hockey impliedly consents to be “checked” or a participant in a pick-up basketball game impliedly consents to being pushed around a bit (BUT does not consent to an intentional punch in the face or a stabbing why does this need to be said?!)
DEFENSES
consent
» test for implied consent
[ intentional torts ]
Would a reasonable person have expected this contact?
DEFENSES
consent
» who may give consent?
[ intentional torts ]
Only those with CAPACITY
= no young kids, insane people, drunks
DEFENSES
consent
» can D exceed the scope of consent?
[ intentional torts ]
Yes, duh
DEFENSES
consent
» type of defense/burden of proof
[ intentional torts ]
affirmative defense for all intentional torts EXCEPT battery (for which P must prove lack of consent)
DEFENSES
defense of self/others/property
» when are such defenses available?
[ intentional torts ]
to use these defenses, D must REASONABLY BELIEVE that the tort is being committed or is about to be committed
(D does not have to be right, as long as his belief is reasonable)
D may NOT retaliate or preempt
(defense must be to prevent the tort)
BUT D CAN pursue a thief in hot pursuit
DEFENSES
defense of self/others/property
» how much force may be used?
[ intentional torts ]
D may use whatever force is REASONABLE under the circumstances (including deadly force) if D or 3P is facing DEATH OR SUBSTANTIAL BODILY HARM
to protect property, D may use any force NOT INTENDED OR LIKELY TO CAUSE DEATH OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY (actual death or serious injury is not the test)
(ex = springs guns, booby traps, land mines, etc. may not be used to protect property)
for home invaders, use self-defense rules if the home is occupied, not defense of property rules (aka deadly force may be used in the right circumstances)
ordinarily, D must make a REQUEST for return of property before using force to get the property back UNLESS OBVIOUSLY FUTILE
force may not be used against someone with a claim of right (potential owner/lessee) to the property
too much force is used = no defense
DEFENSES
defense of self/others/property
» duty to retreat
[ intentional torts ]
D is NEVER required to retreat before using NON-DEADLY force
Majority = D is NOT required to retreat before using DEADLY force
Minority = no duty to retreat before using DEADLY force
(1) from D’s own home or
(2) if retreat cannot be done safely
DEFENSES
defense of self/others/property
» injury to innocent party from use of self-defense
[ intentional torts ]
If D acts in self-defense and an innocent party is injured, D is excused for causing the injury UNLESS he acted NEGLIGENTLY
DEFENSES
necessity
» public necessity
[ intentional torts ]
= COMPLETE defense to PROPERTY torts
(usually trespass to land or conversion)
NEED ELEMENTS
DEFENSES
necessity
» private necessity
[ intentional torts ]
= INCOMPLETE defense to PROPERTY torts
NEED ELEMENTS
DEFENSES
necessity
» necessity + defense of property
[ intentional torts ]
Necessity SUPERSEDES defense of property
= a person may NOT use force to defend property against someone she knows entered the property out of necessity
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» 3 elements
[ defamation ]
Where P is a PRIVATE FIGURE and the ISSUE is NOT OF PUBLIC CONCERN (aka purely private dispute)
- D made a DEFAMATORY STATEMENT about P
- Published (either intentionally or negligently) by D to 3P who understands the statement and the language
- Damages (which are presumed for libel and slander per se)
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» defamatory statement requirement
[ defamation ]
- = statement that exposes P to public hatred, contempt, scorn, shame, or ridicule
- statement must concern facts or opinions implying underlying facts (pure opinions or name-calling will not suffice)
- P must show that a reasonable person
- would think that the statement concerns P AND
- would understand the defamatory nature of the statement (unless defamatory nature of the statement is clear on its face aka defamation per se) - P is NOT required to prove that anyone who heard the statement believed it to be true
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» intent required
[ defamation ]
@ common law, defamation was a strict liability tort
most states today require that the defendant was at least negligent
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» presumption of damages
[ defamation ]
damages are presumed for harm to P’s reputation for:
- ALL LIBEL = written defamation, radio, TV, tape-recordings, most communications by computer
- SLANDER PER SE = oral defamation concerning either
a. P’s trade or profession or
b. accusing P of a serious crime or
c. alleging that P currently has loathsome disease (ex = VD, Leprosy)
d. alleging that P is unchaste
NOTE = for all other slanders, P must prove actual money losses
If P is able to prove actual money losses, P may also obtain damages for reputational harm
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» 4 affirmative defenses
[ defamation ]
- Consent (ex = P consented to release of investigative report)
- Truth (D must prove truth)
- Absolute privileges (if an absolute privilege exists, D may not lose it, regardless of malice)
- Qualified privileges (D will lose a qualified privilege if he makes false statements intentionally, recklessly, maliciously, or over-publishes statement)
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» 4 absolute privileges
[ defamation ]
- statements by fed or state legislators on floor of legislature or in committee sessions
- statements by executive officials in the course of their duties
- statements made in judicial proceedings by judges, jurors, attorneys, parties, and witnesses if in any way related to the proceeding
- statements between spouses
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» 2 qualified privileges
[ defamation ]
Aka conditional privileges
- answering requests for info from prospective employers (references) or credit agencies
- reporting a crime to the police
PRIVATE FIGURE + PRIVATE ISSUE
defamation of private figure with issue not of public concern
» can D lose privileges?
[ defamation ]
D will lose a QUALIFIED privilege if he makes false statements - Intentionally - Recklessly - Maliciously OR over-publishes statement
BUT: if an ABSOLUTE privilege exists, D may not lose it, regardless of malice
PUBLIC FIGURE/OFFICIAL
defamation of public figure/official
» 4 elements
[ defamation ]
Where P is a PUBLIC OFFICIAL, CANDIDATE FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, OR PUBLIC FIGURE (and hence the issue is of PUBLIC CONCERN), public official/figure must prove
- defamatory statement about P
- published by D (to a 3P)
- the statement is false (probably by clear & convincing evidence)
- D acted with actual malice
PUBLIC FIGURE/OFFICIAL
defamation of public figure/official
» actual malice element
[ defamation ]
= D made the statement knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth
aka a subjective belief that it was false (by clear and convincing evidence)
PUBLIC FIGURE/OFFICIAL
defamation of public figure/official
» definition of public official
[ defamation ]
= elected or appointed government official with substantial responsibility over government affairs
(ex = governor, state senator, mayor, police officer)