Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • 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

1/51

Click to flip

51 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Intentional Torts:

Volitional act by defedant
Intent (specific and general)
Causation (But for and Substantil Factor)
Prima Facie Case
Intentional torts

of a plaintiff is never considered in determining if P satisfies the elements of a claim.
Hypersensitivity
Intentional Torts:

i. The intent to commit a certain tort against one person can be transferred to the tort actually committed or to the person actually injured where the defendant:
1. Intends to commit one tort against one person but instead commits a different tort against that person;
2. Commits the same tort as intended but against a different person; or
3. Commits a different tort against a different person
ii. Can only be used where the tort intended and the resulting tort are one of the following: assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to land, or trespass to chattels
Transferred intent
Intentional Torts:

1. Harmful or Offensive Contact
2. With the plaintiffs person or anthing plaintiff is holding onto or connect with
3. Intent, and.
4. Causation
Battery
Intentional Torts:

Act by defendant putting plaintiff to be in apprehending
Of an immediate harmful or offensivecontact of an immediate battery.

Intent and Causation
Assault
Intentional Torts:

1. Volitional Act
2. With intent
3. To Cause
4. An Act of Restraint
5. Which results in confinement in a bounded area.
False Imprisonment
1. Reasonable suspicion;
2. Suspect is on or near the premises;
3. Shop keeper has given notification to the suspect (or received permission); and
4. The detention/search is reasonable (reasonable manner & time)
False Imprisonement = Shop keepers privilege
iii. You may confine someone without his permission (and not be liable for false imprisonment) if you reasonably believe he poses a threat to the safety of others or himself (defense of others)
False imprisonment
intentional torts:

1. volitional act mounting to extreme and outrageous conduct;
2. intent or recklessness;
3. Causation;
4. Severe emotional distress
Intentional infliction of emotional distress
intentional tort:

1. П must be
a. Present when injury occurred
b. Close relative of injured person
c.  had knowledge of both
IIED - bystander cases
Intentional torts:

1. Intent to enter property
2. Physical Invasion
3. on the land of another
trespass to land
intentional torts

1. Intent to deal with anothers' chattel in the manner dealt with it
2. Which caues an interference with teh plaintiff's right of possession through damage or disposission
3. Actual damages
trespassto chattels
intentional torts:

1. intent to deal with another's chattel in manner dealth with it
2. Causing interference with plaintiff's right of possession that is so serious that defendant may be justly required to pay the full value.
Conversion
intentional torts:

Capacity;
Express consent (words)
Implied Consent (custom/usage)
affirmative defenses to inetnaionl torts: consent
intentional torts:

timing must be imminent or in progress;
available when defeant reasonably believes he or another is being atttacked or about to be attacked;
force must be proportional to the threat
self defense
intentional torts:

is about to or being committed; force must be proportional to the threat and no deadly force
defense of property
intentional torts:

public necessity (emergency to protect public or group of people)
Private necessity (emergency to protect own interests, remains liable for acctual harm caused)
privileges
Dignitary Torts:

1.Defamatory statement specifically identify plaintiff;
2. of or concerning the laintiff (reasonable reader);
3. PUblication (3rd party understands)
4. Damage to Reputation
Defamation
Dignitary Torts:

1. Concerning business or profession
2. Alleging crime of moral turpitude
3. Imputing unchastity to a woman
4. Plaintiff suffers from a loathsome disease (leprosy or venereal disease)
Defamation
Dignitary Torts:

Consent
Truth of Statement
Privileges (absolute and qualified)
affirmative defenses to defemtion
Dignitary Torts:

1. Falsity of the statement ( must show falsity)
2. Fault of the defendant (characterize )
if defemation involves a matter of public concern or a ublic official/figure, the plintif must prove
dignitary torts:

plaintiff is a public official/figure:
prove actual malice
dignitary torts:

defendant uses plaintiff's name or picture for commercial advantage
appropriation
dignitary torts:

1. Defendant invades the plaintiff’s seclusion in a way that is offensive or objectionable to a reasonable person
intrusion
dignitary torts:
1. 1) Intentional or unintentional widespread dissemination of a major misrepresentation concerning the plaintiff’s character or beliefs that would be 2) objectionable to a reasonable person.
false light
dignitary torts:

1. Widespread dissemination of truthful, but private/confidential facts about the plaintiff that is objectionable to a reasonable person
disclosure of privagte facts
Negligence:

Duty (owed to foreseeable victims; reasonable prudent person);
Breach; Causation; Damages
Negligence
Negligence:

Superior Knowledge: Disability; Children (age, education, experience and intell)
Negligence: Duties
Negligence:

Occupiers owes no duty
duty - undiscovered tresspasser
Negligence:

2. With respect to conditions, occupier has a duty to protect from known or reasonably knowable, artificial (man-made), and highly dangerous (can cause death or serious injury) conditions that are concealed from the trespasser (fix or warn)
discovered or anticipated/foreseeable tresspasser
neligence:

1. With respect to the occupier’s activities, reasonable prudent person under similar circumstances
2. With respect to conditions, occupier has a duty to protect from all (artificial or natural) known or reasonably knowable conditions that are concealed from the licensee (or fix or warn)
duty - plaintiff is a licensee (social guest/friend
1. With respect to the occupier’s activities, reasonable prudent person under the circumstances.
2. With respect to conditions, occupier has a duty to protect from all known or reasonably knowable (through reasonable inspection) conditions that are concealed from the invitee (or fix or warn)
duty - plaintiff is invitee (business initee/member of public)
negligence:

iii. Injured party is in the class of persons intended to be protected by statute;
iv. The type of harm that occurred was of a type intended to be protected by the statute
Exceptoins: compliance more dangerous or impossible
negligence per se
negligence:

there is no duty to rescueor assist someone in danger; exceptoins:

defendant caused peril; begins to aid; preexisting relationship; and chooses to rescue then "RPPUC"
duty - affirmative duty to act
negligence:

Breach of duty;
show you were in zone of danger;
subsequent physical manifestation of distress

Bystander recovery: physically present and ovbservces event at the same time
NIED
negligence:

what the defendant did wrong; or
violation of statute; or
re ipsa loquitur (type of accident could no have occured without negligence of D, or D probably responsible for negligence)
Breach
Negligence:

b. One Defendant/Separate Identifiable Wrongs by Multiple Defendants
i.“But for” the breach by the defendant, the plaintiff would not have suffered damages
c.Multiple Defendants and Mingled Wrongs i.Each defendant who contributed an act that was a “substantial factor” in the injury can be held jointly liable
3. Multiple Defendants and Unascertaineable cause: i.Burden of proof shifts to each defendant to prove he was not the one to commit the wrongful act
Causatin - Actual Causation
negligence:

a.Defendant must pay for the foreseeable consequences of his negligent actions (foreseeable  & injury)
i. A direct cause of a plaintiff’s injury is almost always a legal cause because it is foreseeable
ii. An indirect cause of a plaintiff’s injury is a legal cause, and defendant is liable for the plaintiff’s entire injury, if: intervening events (malpractice, rescue, disease/accident)
proximate causation
negligence:

a. When a defendant is liable for negligence, he is liable for the entire damage suffered by the plaintiff no matter how extensive (medical expenses, lost wages, pain/suffering) and a defendant takes his plaintiff as he finds him
egg shell skull rule
negligence:

1. Defendant’s liability can be reduced by the amount of plaintiff’s fault (as determined by the jury) if defendant can prove a “failure by plaintiff to exercise the relevant degree of care for his own safety (RPP std).”
affirmative defense - comparative fault
negligence:

1.  must have 1) known of the risk; and 2) voluntarily proceeded in the face of the risk.
voluntary assumption of risk
Strict LIability:
i. Domesticated Animals (dog bite; prize-fighting bull)
1. No strict liability unless your dog has vicious propensities (has bitten someone before) (could recover for negligence if met though).
ii. Trespassing Cattle
1. Strict liability for all harm done
iii. Wild Animals
1. Strict liability for all harm done
2. injury rec’d is characteristic for that type of wild animal – running away!
animals
strict liability:

1. It is something that can’t be made safe through precautionary measures
2. It poses a risk of severe harm
3. The activity is uncommon in the area where it is conducted
a. Explosives, chemical or biological hazardous material (chlorine gas, acid, anthrax), or nuclear energy/radiation
ultra hazardous activities
strict liabilty:

1. plaintiff is a consumer, user
2. D = Merchant
3. Defective Product (Defectiely Man. - bad product in line) (Defectively Designed - not safe for use, could have been made safter in cost effecgive way) (failure to warn about dangers);
4. Defect existed when left defendant
5. Plaintiff made foreseeable use of the product;
5. Causation
6. Damages
products
Nuisance:
An act that unreasonable intereferes with the health, safety, or property rights of the community
public nuisance
Nuisance:

a substantial and unreasonable intereference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his land. Defenses - zoning ordinance and P assumed risk
privte nuisance
General Torts:

a. An employer is vicariously liable for torts committed by their employees if the tort is carried out within the scope of employment
vicarous liability: respondent superior
general torts:

a. Hiring party is not vicariously liable for torts committed by independent contractors, unless:
i. The hiring party is an occupier of land and the independent contractor hurts an invitee (member of the public) – nondelegable b/c public policy
ii. The independent contractor is engaged in peculiarly hazardous activity that presents risks that require unusual precautions
vicarious liability: independant contract
a. Automobile owner is not vicariously liable for torts committed by a driver unless the owner lent the driver his car to run an errand for the owner (in which case the driver becomes an agent of the owner)
b. An owner may be liable for its own negligence in entrusting a vehicle to a driver with a bad driving record and the owner is aware of that fact (breach of duty to other drivers)
vicarious liability:
automobileowners and drivers
general torts:

When two or more negligent acts combine to proximately cause an indivisible injury, each negligent actor will be liable to П for the entire damage)
joint and severaly liable
general torts:

1. When a tort is committed against a married person, the uninjured spouse can file a separate claim to recover loss of services (laundry, cleaning, cooking, mowing), loss of society (companionship/emotional support), and loss of sex
married people - loss of consortium