Torts Flashcards
Vicarious Liability - Negligence of Employee
Employer’s liabile for the negligence of their employees commited while servants are acting within the scope of their employment
detour= quick stop on route & is w/in scope
frolic= significant deviation from job & not w/in scope
Liability for Negligence of Independent Contractor
Principal is liable for the negligence of IC when:
1) IC is engaged in an inherently dangerous activity; or
2) non-delegable duty is involved (e.g. duty to keep premises safe/ keep car in working condition)
Liability for Intentional Torts (both EE/IC)
Employer/Principle is generally not liable for the intentional torts of an employee/IC UNLESS:
- force is authorized in the employment;
- friction is generated by the employment; or
- EE/IC is furthering the business of the ER/P (must have authority whether implied, apparent, or express)
Assault
1) volitional act
2) done w/ the intent to cause either:
a) a harmful or offensive contact OR
b) an apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact
3) that causes the reasonable apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact
NOTE: D must have intent to do the contact not necessarily the harm
Battery
- Volitional act (conscious muscle movement)
- Done w/ intent to cause either
- harmful of offensive contact; OR
- an apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact
- that causes harmful or offensive contact to the person of another
harmful= slightest physical change
offensive based on society’s standard/ person of ordinary sensitivity
NOTE: D must have intent to do the contact not necessarily the harm
False Imprisonment
- an act intending to confine someone w/in boundaries fixed by the actor
- that directly or indirectly results in such confinement AND
- plaintiff is either conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it
confinement includes denial of the means to leave and threats of immediate force
Shopkeeper’s Privilege
Can Claim privilege if:
1) △ has reasonable grounds to believe theft occured
2) hold P for a reasonable time to ascertain the facts
3) in a reasonable manner
(Defense to False Imprisonment)
Crime Prevention
a private person may arrest someone if they have a reasonable belief that a crime has occured that involves breach of the peace (causing a disturbance)
(Defense to False Imprisonment)
Trespass to Chattels
1) an act which is an intermeddling or dispossession
2) of the personal property of another
2) which causes harm to OR loss of use of the property
Conversion
interference w/ P’s right of possession that is serious enough to warrant that △ pay full value of the chattel
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)
1) commission of an act
2) that constitutes extreme & ourtageous conduct
3) that causes severe emotional distress
NOTE: Don’t need to show physical harm
Abuse of Process
- using a legitimate process; (e.g., discovery, complaint, etc.)
- for a wrongful purpose; AND
- an act or threat against the P to accomplish the wrongful purpose
wrongful purpose = using process for anything other than what its intended for
Malicious Prosecution
1) initiation of civil or criminal proceedings w/out probable cause
2) for wrongful purpose; AND
3) favorable termination of the proceedings on the merits
Protective Privilege of: Self Defense, Defense of Others, or Defense of Property
applicable when:
- threat is in progress or imminent;
- there is a reasonable belief that the threat is generating (accuracy)
- response is proportional to the level of threat
Negligence
to establish a prima facie case for negligence the plaintiff must prove: duty, breach, actual cause, proximate cause, and harm
General Duty
the duty owed to all foreseeable plaintiffs is the duty to act as a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances
(∏ is foreseeable if in they are in the zone of danger. if they’re not, then discuss Cardozo/ Andrews split)
Under the majority Cardozo view, a foreseeable plaintiff is one who is in the “zone of danger”. Under the minority Andrews view, the defendant owes a duty to any plaintiff that suffers as a proximate result of their actions.
Land Owner/ Possessor Duty to Person OFF the Premises
Generally owe no duty to protect someone outside/off the premises from natural or artificial conditions on the land EXCEPT FOR DUTY TO:
- protect from unreasonably dangerous artificial conditions abutting adjacent land
- take precautions to protect passerby from dangerous conditions
- maintain trees
Land Owner/ Possessor Duty to Person ON the Premises
Liability depends on classification of the person coming onto the land as an invitee, licensee, or trespasser
Invitee
on the premises for the business purpose of the owner (e.g., customer)
Owner/ possessor has a duty to inspect, discover, repair or protect against harm if they:
- know or should’ve discovered the condition,
- should realize that it poses an unreasonable risk of harm; and
- should expect that the invitee will not discover/realize the danger or will fail to protect themselves
Licensee
on the premises for their own purpose (e.g. guest)
Owner/ possessor has a duty to repair & protect against known dangers if:
- know or have reason to know of the condition & should realize that it involves an unreasonable risk of harm to llcensees & should expect that licensees will not discover/ realize the danger AND
- fail to exercise reasonable care to make condition safe or warn licensee of the condition/ risk AND
- licensee doesn’t know or have reason to know of the condition or risk involved
Known Trespasser
Owner/ possessor owes a duty to adequately warn of any artificial dangerous conditions maintained by them & will be liable for harm if:
1) likely to cause death or serious bodily harm;
2) not likely to be discovered by trespasser &
3) failed to exercise reasonable care to warn
Unknown Trespasser
No duty but can’t use willful and wanton conduct
Attractive Nuisance Doctrine
plaintiff must show:
- there’s a dangerous condition on the premises that the owner is/should be aware of;
- owner knows that kids frequent the vicinity
- condition is likely to cause injury bc of kids inability to appreciate the risk;
- expense of remedying the situation is slight compared to the magnitude of the risk
Other Standard’s of Care
Professionals –standard of care is the care used by average member of the profession in good standing
Children – child must conform to the standard of care of a child of like age, intelligence,& experience. However, if they are engaged in an adult activity, they are held to standard of care as an adult.
Common Carrier/ Innkeeper –heightened duty to use the highest degree of care to aid & assist passengers
Firefighters Rule – firefighters & cops are barred from recovering for injuries caused by inherent risks of their jobs
Rescuers – rescuee liable to rescuer who is injured in course of the rescue if rescuee’s own negligence put them in a position of requiring a rescue
Custom – custom/ usage in industry or trade may be used as evidence of a duty or lack thereof
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Plaintiff must be in the zone of danger from the negligence& suffered physical symptoms from the emotional distress for there to be an appreciable duty.
Exceptions to the zone of danger requirement
- ∏ is closely related to person injured, was present at the scene, & perceived the injury;
- duty arises out of special relationship & negligence has great potential to cause emotional distress (e.g. physician patient);
- mishandling of a relatives corpse or erroneously stating a relative has died
Breach
when the defendant’s conduct falls below the level required by the applicable standard of care, she has breached her duty
Res Ipsa Loquitor
when the breach of a duty is unknown, can infer negligence if
- △ had control of the instrumentality of the harm &
- harm would not have occurred in the absence of negligence
Actual Cause
requires that but for the △ conduct, the harm would not have occurred to the ∏
if concurrent causes & either alone is sufficient as a cause, use substantial factor test
If unascertainable cause, both liable unless one can argue the other did it