• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/8

Click to flip

8 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Prima Facie Case for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
The zone of danger rule:
(1) P was within the zone of danger, i.e., P's emotional distress was caused by a threat of physical impact
(2) P suffered physical symptoms from the emotional distress (not necessary in extreme cases OR if the claim is added onto another tort that caused physical injury to P)

For bystanders not in the zone of danger, the bystander rule (rejected in NY):
(1) the injured person and the bystander are closely related
(2) the bystander was present at the scene of injury,
(3) the bystander personally observed the event.
When a Duty to Act Exists
(1) voluntary admission of aid - a duty of reasonable care in the rendering of aid
(2) D creates (even if innocently) peril where rescue is necessary
(3) well-established customs or patterns (emergency care by hospitals)
(4) special relationships (employer-employee, parent-child, common carriers-passengers, innkeepers-guests, invitor-invitee, school-pupil)
(5) exceptions to no duty to control conduct of third parties: (i) when the owner of a vehicle entrusts the vehicle to someone he knows is unfit to operate it (but generally not liable for the negligence of a person who borrows the vehicle for his own purposes), (ii) if a parrent allowed a child to use a dangerous instrumentality OR the parent failed to take corrective measures to keep a child from committing some harm which the parent knew or should have known the child was likely to commit (but generally no liability)
Landowner's Duty to Those Off Land
Generally, no duty. Exceptions:
(1) unreasonable, dangerous artificial conditions
(2) if the landowner does not take due precautions to protect a passerby from the artificially dangerous conditions on his land
(3) for urban area possessors: a duty to reasonably protect from injury caused by the condition of trees on or near highways.
Landowner's Duty to Trespassers
Generally, no duty to rescue and no duty to inspect. Exceptions:
(1) to discovered or expected trespassers: a duty to warn of, or to make safe, artificial conditions known by the landowner that present a risk of death or serious bodily harm and are unlikely to be discovered by the trespasser
(2) to child trespassers: ordinary care with regard to artificial conditions.
Prima Facie Case for Landowner's Negligence in Cases of Child Trespassers
(1) a dangerous condition on the land of which D knew or should have known (anything that can cause injury to children because of their inability to appreciate the risk)
(2) D knew that children frequently used the land
(3) the condition is likely to cause injury
(4) the cost of fixing the condition is minor compared to the risk of injury
Res Ipsa Loquitur
RIL establishes a prima facie case of negligence if:

(1) there is no direct evidence of how D behaved in connection with the event
(2) the event causing injury would normally not have occurred in the absence of negligence
(3) D was in exclusive control of the instrumentality causing injury
(4) P must not have voluntarily contributed to the event causing his injury
Slander Per Se
There is only one situation where P must prove special damages as part of his defamation claim: when his claim is based on slander and it is not slander per se:

(1) statements accusing someone of a crime
(2) statements alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease
(3) statements adversely reflecting on a person's fitness to conduct her business or trade
(4) statements imputing serious sexual misconduct to someone (almost always to a woman)
Bases for Strict Liability
There are only three ways D can be strictly liable (i.e., liable without regard to fault or intent):

(1) by keeping a wild animal - it can be an exotic pet even if is not considered dangerous OR a domesticated pet if the owner had reason to know it's dangerous

(2) by conducting an abnormally dangerous activity - generally, cannot be performed with complete safety no matter how much care is taken (fumigation, the use of explosives, blasting, excavation, mining)

(3) by selling a defective product (strict products liability)