Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
32 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Battery |
The intent to 1) touch 2) actual touching and; 3) Offensive. All three must be present to commit the tort. |
|
|
Keel v. Hainline
∏ hit with eraser ∆ were throwing around while waiting for the teacher. Which rule came from this case regarding battery? |
Where, however, the basis of an action is assault and battery, the intention with which the injury was done is immaterial so far as the maintenance of the action is concerned, provided the act causing the injury was wrongful, for if the the act was wrongful, the intent must necessarily have been wrongful. |
|
|
Which type of intent is needed to prove battery? 3 types |
Malicious, willful, or specific wrongful intent. |
|
|
Is knocking or snatching anything from somone's hand considered battery? |
It could be if it is done in a rude or insolent manner, is sufficient. |
|
|
Mohr v. Williams ∆ did surgery on a different ear bc it was worse than the other and wasn't seen during regular appointment. Is this considered battery? |
The patient must be the final arbiter as to whether he will take his chances with the operation, or take his chances living without it. |
|
|
Brzoska v. Olson AIDS dentist who worked on patience knowing he had the disease. Is this battery because it's offensive? |
A battery consists of a touching of a substantially different nature and character that which the patient consented. |
|
|
Werth v. Taylor
Against her religion to receive blood, signed form refusing prior to being admitted to hospital. Doctor's gave transfusion anyway. Is this battery? |
Consent is implied where an emergency procedure is required and there is no opportunity to obtain actual consent or where the patient seeks treatment or otherwise manifests a willingness to submit to a particular treatment. When life is at stake, consent is not needed. |
|
|
Hart v. Geysel Engaged in illegal prize fight. ∏ died as a result. Is the ∆ liable for damages? |
One who has sufficiently expressed his willingness to suffer a particular invasion has no right to complaint if another acts upon his consent so given. |
|
|
Hollerud v. Malamis ∏ in a bar, drunk, entered wrestling match with the bartender. ∏ was injured as a result. Is ∆ liable for battery and assault? |
Consent is ineffective given the intoxicated state. |
|
|
Miller v. Couvillion ∏ and ∆ were doing a karate demonstration. ∏ hurt himself while ∆ tried to do something.
|
There was no intentional contact from employer. No liability. |
|
|
Conversion (Trespassing tort) |
1) Exercise dominion or control over a chattel which 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. |
|
|
Trespass to Chattels |
∆ has interfered with the plaintiff's personal property to such an extent that the ∆ is required to pay its full value- a kind of forced judicial sale of the property from the ∏ to the ∆. |
|
|
Ways to committing Trespass to Chattel |
a) dispossessing another of the chattel, or b) using or intermeddling with a chattel (movable property. Personal property) in the possession of another. |
|
|
Conversion by Destruction or Alteration |
One who intentionally destroys a chattel or so materially alters its physical condition as to change its identity or character. |
|
|
Desnick v. ABC ∆ secretly recorded eye exam for an expose. Is this considered trespassing? |
Nothing was disrupted, nor was anyone's private space invaded. Consent procured by fraud is not limited to trespass. |
|
|
Pegg v. Gray ∆ let dogs out during hunting season. Went to neighbors yard and caused damages. Is he liable for trespass? |
The owner or keeper, in the absence of permission to hunt previously obtained, is liable for trespass. Should have known this trespass could happen and it was more likely than not to happen. |
|
|
Malouf v. Dallas Athletic Country Club ∏ lives next door to club, and their car was hit. Suing for trespass. Is the club liable for trespass? |
No. The golfers did not intend for the ball to hit the car. |
|
|
Conditional or Restricted Consent |
A conditional or restricted consent to enter land creates a privilege to do so only in so far as the condition or restriction is complied with. |
|
|
Liability for Intentional Intrusions on Land |
Liable for trespass if: a) enters land in the possession of the other, or causes a thing or a third person to do so or, b) remains on the land, or c) fails to remove from the land a thing which he is under a duty to remove. |
|
|
Intrusion Under Mistake |
One who intentionally enters land in the possession of another is subject to liability to the possessor of the land as a trespasser, although he acts under a mistaken belief of the law. |
|
|
Non-liability for Accidental Intrusions |
An unintentional and non-negligent entry on land in the possession of another does not subject the actor to liability to the possessor. |
|
|
False Imprisonment |
Liable if: a) he acts intending to confine the other or a third person within boundaries fixed by the actor and; b) his act directly or indirectly results in such a confinement of the other and c) the other is conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it. 2) An act which is not done with the intention stated in section1 does not make the actor liable. |
|
|
What Constitutes Confinement |
1) The other's confinement must be complete 2) Confinement is complete although there is a reasonable means of escape, unless the other knows of it. 3) Actor does not become liable be intentionally preventing another from going in a particular direction in which he has a right or privilege to go. |
|
|
Confinement by Physical Barriers |
Confinement may be actual or apparent physical barriers. |
|
|
Bagget v. National Bank & Trust Co. ∏ was arrested by police after the teller positively identified ∏ to police. Further investigation shows ∏ did not write note. Is bank liable for false imprisonment? |
No. Decision to arrest ∏ was made solely by the police, based on banks good faith account of what had happened. |
|
|
Assualt |
An 1) Intentional 2) Action that 3) Creates Imminent apprehension 4) Harmful or Offensive 5) Physical Contact. |
|
|
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (or Outrage) |
Intentionally or recklessly or have been certain or substantially certain that his actions would cause the plaintiff severe distress to the 1) degree to which the conduct was outrageous, the actor's knowledge that the other is particularly suspectible to emotional distress. There must be 3) a casual connection between ∆'s action and ∏'s emotional distress. 4) Degree of the plaintiff's emotional distress. |
|
|
How severe does Emotional Distress have to be to have a claim? |
So severe a reasonable person could not have been expected to endure the emotional distress. |
|
|
Katko v. Briney Rigged house to shoot burglar. ∏ was shot while breaking in the home while they were not there. Are ∆ liable to ∏? |
There is no privilege to use any force calculated to cause death or serious bodily injury to repel the threat to land or chattels, unless there is also such a threat to the ∆s personal safety as to justify self-defense. |
|
|
Ploof v. Putnam ∆ undocked a boat that was moored because ∏ was saving lives and his property during a horrible storm. Sued ∆ for unmooring boat and causing injuries. Is ∆ liable for trespassing own property and injuries he didn't cause? |
One may sacrifice the personal property of another to save his life or the lives of his fellows. Doctrine of necessity applies with special force to the preservation of human life. |
|
|
When are property rights suspened? |
When forces beyond human control and if without the direct intervention of some act by the one sought to be held liable, the property of another was injured, such injury must be attributed to the act of God, and not the wrongful act of the person sought to be charged. |
|
|
Lander v. Seaver Teacher whipped child left marks. Is he liable for damages? |
yes. A schoolmaster has the right to inflict reasonable corporeal punishment. He must exercise reasonable judgement and discretion in determining when to punish and to what extent. |
