TORTS - Fall 2012 Flashcards
Trespass to Chattel
A trespass to a chattel may be committed by intentionally:
(a) dispossessing another of the chattel, or
(b) using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession of another
R2T218 - Liability to Person in Possession
One who commits a trespass to a chattel is subject to liability to the possessor of the chattel, if, and only if,
(a) he dispossesses the other of the chattel, or
(b) he chattel is impaired as to its condition, quality or value, or
c) the possessor is deprived of the use of the chattel for a substantial time, or
(d) bodilt harm is caused to the possessor, or harm is caused to some person or thing in which the possessor has a legally protected interest
R2T222A - Conversion Defined (1) of (2)
(1) Conversion is an intenitonal exercise of dominion control over a chattel which is so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the chattel.
R2T 222A - Elements to Conversion (2) of (2)
(2) In determining the seriouslness of the interference and the justice of requiring the actor to pay the full value, the following factors are important:
(a) the extent and duration of the actor’s exercise of dominion or control;
(b) the actor’s intent to assert a right in fact inconsistent with the other’s right of control;
c) the actor’s good faith
(d) the extent and duration of the resulting interference with the other’s right of control;
(e) the harm done to the chattel
(f) the inconvenience and expense caused to the other.
Concept of Intent
R3T §5 “Actor who intentionally causes physical harm is subject to liability for that harm.”
The phrase “intentionally causes physical harm” describes tortious intent
It is both an intentional act and a harm.
This concept applies to Torts for Physical Harm (R3T) and other intentional torts.
Battery - SATL Def.
Intentional infliction of unconsented bodily contact that is harmful or offensive.
Battery - Rest. Definition
R2T § 13 (harmful) ; § 18 (offensive):
An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if
(a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of another or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and
(b) a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results.
Assault - Rest. Def. R2T21
R2T § 21. Assault.
(1) Act intending to cause battery or imminent apprehension of battery
(2) P is thereby put in such imminent apprehension.
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - Rest.
AKA: OUTRAGE
R2T § 46
(1) Extreme or Outrageous Conduct
(2) Causing severe emotional distress
Can commit IIED/RIED/Outrage to 3P
(1) Member of immediate family who is present whether or not distress results in bodily harm, or
(2) Any other person who is present if distress results in bodily harm.
False Imprisonment - Rest 2T35
(1) Δ acts to confine P or 3P within boundaries fixed by Δ
(2) Δ’s act directly or indirectly results in such a confinement
(3) P is conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it.
Exception: Reasonable means of escape known to P
Assault - Common Def.
Assault: Apprehension of imminent contact that is harmful or offensive
Confinement
Reasonable escape includes slight inconvenience, embarrassment, “technical invasion” of property Being forced to follow Retention of property Partial interference is not confinement Without Consent Exception: Consent can be revoked
Modes of Confinement
Physical barriers—
Look for island, ship, security area, locked room
Palatial yacht, luxury hotel large ranch can be boundaries
Use of force Threat of imminent use of force Assertion of legal authority Forced to follow Retention of property cf. Noble v. Louisville Transfer
Conversion (what to look for)
Demand for return—If D obtained chattels legitimately, there is no conversion until possessor demands return or there is an independent act of conversion. (Watch for pawn shop, tow yard, storage facility, etc.)
Bona Fide Purchasers [for value]—If ignorant of seller’s wrongful possession, will be protected. (Watch for $15 iPad4, etc.)
Manifestation of Consent
Actual consent manifested by:
Words
Affirmative actions (nodding, presenting arm, etc.)
Silence or inaction when non-consenter would speak or take action (e.g., withdraw)
Effective even if not communicated to D
Capacity (3 i’s) relating to consent
3 I’s (Infancy, Insanity, Intoxication) prevents consent if it precludes appreciation of nature, extent and probable consequences of “consensual” conduct
Implied consent
“Legal fiction”
Implied consent rationale
Court reasons that invasion is less important than interest protected by invasion such that a person would consent.
When Mistake Caused by D vitiates consent
- Mistake caused by D’s fraud
MAJ: Vitiates consent
min: Fraud in the essence—material misrepresentation
Cf. Fraud in the inducement
Trend: Any material fraud known to D and unknown to P - Mistake caused by D’s negligence may vitiate consent
- Mistake not caused by D; Mutual mistake does not vitiate consent
Consent obtained by duress
Consent obtained by duress is invalid Force or threat of force P, his family P’s and his family’s property Economic force not recognized (but look for special relationship (common carrier, boss, acting teacher)
consent to criminal act
Consent to criminal act (e.g. mutual combat)
R2T § 829C(1) Consent is effective
Split: Cannot consent to an act the law forbids
unequal position
Unequal position (in pari delicto) Parties may both be wrong, but one may be protected by law (e.g. boxer but not boxing promoter of illegal match )
Defense of Self and Others
Not available to aggressor unless he abandons attack in which case other party may become aggressor
Reasonable mistake does not defeat privilege.
min: Actor steps in shoes of “victim”
Retaliation is not defense.
Retreat
Min: Duty to retreat except home (m/b work)
Statutory limits on duty to retreat. E.g., Florida v. Zimmerman.
Battered woman syndrome—Jury nullifications, executive clemency but no reported cases
Defense of self and others bars negligence claims
Scope of response—reasonable vs. best
Defense of Property
Mistake of fact does not destroy privilege.
Mistake as to superior privilege does destroy privilege. (unless induced by P)
Case may involve threats to Property and People
Defense against animals follows same rules
Statutory expansion may allow use of deadly force to defend property
Recapture of Chattels
Applies to property taken by fraud, force or other tortious conduct
Reasonable time
D liable for mistake creating privilege
P has no right to resist reasonable force
Detention for Investigation (Rest. 120A)
R2T §120A— Reasonable belief D tortiously took chattels On premises Privileged to detain on premises for reasonable investigation