Chapter 6 - Tort Law

Front 1

Tort

Back 1

A tort is a violation of a duty imposed by the civil law. (p. 132)

Front 2

Defamation

Back 2

Defamation involves a false statement, likely to harm another’s reputation, which is uttered to a third person and causes an injury. Opinion and privilege are valid defenses. Public personalities can win a defamation suit only by proving actual malice. (pp. 133-135)

Front 3

False Imprisonment

Back 3

False imprisonment is the intentional restraint of another prison without reasonable cause and without consent. (p. 136)

Front 4

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Back 4

The intentional infliction of emotional distress involves extreme and outrageous conduct that causes serious emotional harm. (p. 137)

Front 5

Battery and Assault

Back 5

Battery is an intentional touching of another person in a way that is offensive. Assault involves an act that makes the plaintiff fear an imminent battery. (pg. 138)

Front 6

Compensatory damages

Back 6

Compensatory damages are the normal remedy in a tort case. In unusual cases, the court may award punitive damages to punish the defendant. (pp. 138-139)

Front 7

Tortious interference

Back 7

Tortious interference with business relations involves the defendant harming an existing contract or a prospective relationship that has a definite expectation of success. (p. 142)

Front 8

Unreasonable intrusion

Back 8

The related torts of privacy and publicity involve unreasonable intrusion into someone’s private life or unfair commercial exploitation by using someone’s name, likeness, or voice without permission. (pp. 143)

Front 9

Duty

Back 9

If the defendant could foresee that misconduct would injure a particular person, he probably has a duty to her. (p. 144)

Front 10

Duty of due care

Back 10

A defendant breaches his duty of due care by failing to behave the way a reasonable person would under similar conditions. (p. 147)

Front 11

Negligence

Back 11

Employers may be liable for negligent hiring or retention of employees (p. 147)

Front 12

Negligence per se

Back 12

If a legislature sets a minimum standard of care for a particular activity in order to protect a certain group of people, and a violation of the statute injures a member of that group, the defendant has committed negligence per se. (p. 147)

Front 13

Factual cause

Back 13

If an event physically leads to the ultimate harm, it is the factual cause. (p. 148)

Front 14

Foreseeable type of harm

Back 14

For the defendant to be liable, the type of harm must have been reasonably foreseeable. (p 148)

Front 15

Genuine harm

Back 15

The plaintiff must persuade the court that he has suffered a harm that is genuine, not speculative.

Front 16

Contributory vs. Comparative negligence

Back 16

In a contributory negligence state, a plaintiff who is even slightly responsible for his own injury recovers nothing; in a comparative negligence state, the jury may apportion liability between plaintiff and defendant. (p. 151)

Front 17

Strict liability

Back 17

A defendant is strictly liable for harm caused by an ultrahazardous activity or a defective product. Strict liability means that if the defendant’s conduct led to the harm, the defendant is liable, even if she exercised extraordinary care. (p. 152)

Front 18

Commercial Exploitation

Back 18

Protects the exclusive right to use one's own name, likeness, or voice.

Front 19

Elements of Negligence

Back 19

The five elements of negligence are duty of care, breach, factual causation, proximate causation, and damages.

Front 20

Landowner's Liability

Back 20

In most states, a landowner's duty of due care is lowest to trespassers; higher to a licensee (anyone on the land for her own purposes but with the owner's permission); and highest of all to an invitee (someone on the property by right).

Front 21

Breach

Back 21

A defendant breaches by failing to meet his duty of care.

Front 22

Proximate Cause

Back 22

For the defendant to be liable, the type of harm must have been reasonably foreseeable.

Front 23

Damages

Back 23

The plaintiff must persuade the court that he has suffered a harm that is genuine, not speculative.

Front 24

True or False:

In a civil law suit, the defendant is likely to be found guilty if there is enough evidence that he/she has committed a tort.

Back 24

False: Only in a criminal case, a defendant can be found guilty.

Front 25

Libel

Back 25

Written defamation.

Front 26

Slander

Back 26

Oral Defamation

Front 27

Element

Back 27

Something a plaintiff must prove to win a lawsuit in a defamation case. Elements in a defamation case include:

Defamatory statement, Falseness, the statement is communicated, and injury.

Front 28

Actual Malice

Back 28

Actual malice means the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard of the truth.

Front 29

True or False:

Due to the doctrine of false imprisonment, a store may not detain a customer if it is against the will of the customer.

Back 29

False:

Generally a store may detain a customer or worker for alleged shoplifting provided there is a reasonable basis for the suspicion and the detention is done reasonably.

Front 30

What does the single recovery principle state?

Back 30

The single recovery principle requires a court to settle the matter once and for all, by awarding a lump sum for past and future expenses.

Front 31

True or false:

Courts typically award punitive damages in cases of negligent torts.

Back 31

False:

The idea behind punitive damages is that it is generally in a case of intentional tort.

Front 32

What guides are used in awarding punitive damages?

Back 32

(1)The reprehensibility (deserving of rebuke) of the conduct

(2) The ratio should not be more than 9 times the compensatory award, although this is not an absolute rule.

(3) The difference between the punitive award and any civil penalties used in similar cases.

Front 33

What are the 4 elements a plaintiff must establish to win a tortious interference with a contract case?

Back 33

(1) There was a contract between the plaintiff and a third party

(2) The defendant knew of the contract

(3) The defendant improperly induced the third party to breach the contract or made performance of the contract impossible; and

(4) There was injury to the plaintiff

Front 34

Intrusion

Back 34

Intrusion into someone's private life is a tort if a reasonable person would find it offensive.

Front 35

Money awarded to punish a wrongdoer

Back 35

Punitive Damages

Front 36

Intentionally restraining another person without reasonable cause

Back 36

False Imprisonment

Front 37

Intentional deception, frequently used to obtain contract with another party.

Back 37

Fraud

Front 38

Deliberately stealing a client who has a contract with another party

Back 38

Interference with Contract

Front 39

Violation of the exclusive right to use one's own name, likeness, or voice

Back 39

Commercial exploitation

Front 40

Using a false statement to damage someone's reputation

Back 40

Defamation

Front 41

An act so extreme that an average person would say "Outrageous!"

Back 41

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Front 42

True / False:

A store manager who believes a customer has stolen something may question him but not restrain him.

Back 42

False

Front 43

Becky punches Kelly in the nose. Becky hascommitted the tort of assault.

Back 43

False, Becky committed the tort of battery.

Front 44

A defendant cannot be liable for defamation ifthe statement, no matter how harmful, is true.

Back 44

True

Front 45

In most cases, a winning plaintiff receivescompensatory and punitive damages.

Back 45

False

Front 46

A beer company that wishes to include acelebrity’s picture in its magazine ads must first obtain the celebrity’spermission.

Back 46

True

Front 47

1. A valid defense in a defamation suit is

(a) Falseness.

(b) Honest error.

(c) Improbability.

(d) Opinion.

(e) Third-party reliance.

Back 47

(d) Opinion

Front 48

Joe Student, iratethat on an exam he received a B- rather than a B, stands up in class and throwshis laptop at the professor. The professor sees it coming and ducks just intime; the laptop smashes against the chalkboard. Joe has committed

(a) Assault.

(b) Battery.

(c) Negligence.

(d) Slander.

(e) No tort, because the laptop missed theprofessor.e1|

Back 48

(a) Assault

Front 49

Marsha, asupervisor, furiously berates Ted in front of 14 other employees, calling him“a loser, an incompetent, a failure as an employee and as a person.” She handsaround copies of Ted’s work and for twenty minutes mocks his efforts. If Tedsues Marsha, his best claim will be

(a) Assault.

(b) Battery.

(c) Intentionalinfliction of emotional distress.

(d) Negligence.

(e) Interference with a contract.

Back 49

(c) Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Front 50

Rodney is a star player on the Los Angeles Lakers basketball team. He has two years remaining on his four-year contract. The Wildcats, a new team in the league, try to lure Rodney away from the Lakers by offering him more money, and Rodney agrees to leave Los Angeles. The Lakers sue. The Lakers will

(a) Win a case of defamation.

(b) Win a case of commercial exploitation.

(c) Win a case of intentional interference with a contract.

(d) win a case of negligence.

(e) Lose.

Back 50

(c) Win a case of intentional interference with a contract

Front 51

Hank and Antonio,drinking in a bar, get into an argument that turns nasty. Hank punches Antonioseveral times, knocking him down and breaking his nose and collarbone. Whichstatement is true?

(a) Antonio could sue Hank, who might be foundguilty in his suit.

(b) Antonioand the state could start separate criminal cases against Hank.

(c) Antoniocould sue Hank, and the state could prosecute Hank.

(d) The state could prosecute Hank, but only withAntonio’s permission.

(e) If the state prosecutes Hank, he will be foundliable or not liable, depending on the evidence.

Back 51

(b) Antonio and the state could start separate criminal cases against Hank.