Intro Ot Law

Front 1

assault

Back 1

intentional threat of immediate harm

Front 2

battery

Back 2

performing an act of physical harm upon another person

Front 3

strict liability

Back 3

liability regardless of fault

Front 4

false imprisonment

Back 4

intentional confinement or restraint of another person's activities without justification

Front 5

restraints

Back 5

physical barriers, physical restraint, threats of physical force

Front 6

not restraints

Back 6

moral principle and threats of future harm

Front 7

intentional infliction of emotional distress

Back 7

an intentional act involving extreme and outrageous conduct that results in severe emotional distress to another

Front 8

fraudulent misrepresentation

Back 8

any misrepresentation of a material fact knowingly made with the intention of deceiving another and on which a reasonable person would and does rely to his or her detriment

Front 9

puffery

Back 9

a salesperson's exaggerated claims about the quality of property offered for sale

Front 10

3 elements necessary for wrongful interference with a contractual interference

Back 10

1. a valid, enforceable contract must exist between 2 parties

2. a third party must know that this contract exists

3. the 3rd party must intentionally induce a party to breach the contract

Front 11

business relationship

Back 11

you can't interfere with other businesses in attempt to gain share of their market

Front 12

defenses

Back 12

you can avoid liability by showing it was justified or permitable as long as it is competition and not trying to privatize the market

Front 13

trespass to land

Back 13

entry onto, above, or below the surface of land owned by another without the owners permission

Front 14

trespass to personal property

Back 14

unlawful taking or harming of another's personal property or the interference with another's right to the exclusive possession of his or her personal party

Front 15

conversion

Back 15

wrongfully taking or retaining possession of an individuals personal property and placing it in the service of another (item is completely destroyed or stolen)

Front 16

trespass to chattels

Back 16

the unlawful destruction of property, but also anything that diminishes its value (item is damaged but not fully destroyed)

Front 17

disparagement of property

Back 17

economically injurious falsehood made about another's product or property

Front 18

slander of quality (trade libel)

Back 18

publication of false info about another's product, alleging that it is not what its seller claims

Front 19

slander of title

Back 19

publication of a statement that denies or casts doubt on another's legal ownership of any property, causing financial loss to the other

Front 20

negligence

Back 20

failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in similar circumstances

Front 21

Negligence (plaintiff must prove what?)

Back 21

1. Duty: that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff

2. Breach: that the defendant breached that duty

3. Causation: that the defendant's breach caused the plaintiff's injury

4. Damages: that the plaintiff suffered a legally recognizable injury

Front 22

Duty of Care

Back 22

duty of all persons, as established by tort law, to exercise a reasonable amount of care in their dealings with others

Front 23

Duty of Care (Breach)

Back 23

- people in society are free to act as they please as long as their actions don't infringe on the interests of others

- when someone fails to comply with the duty to exercise reasonable care

Front 24

reasonable person

Back 24

standard of behavior expected of a hypothetical "reasonable person"

Front 25

malpractice

Back 25

professional misconduct or the lack of the requisite degree of skill as a professional

Front 26

Is there causation in fact?

Back 26

if the injury would not have occurred without the defendants act, then there is causation in fact

Front 27

Was the act the proximate cause of injury?

Back 27

this exists when the connection between act and injury is strong enough to justify liability

Front 28

assumption of risk

Back 28

doctrine under which a plaintiff may not recover for injuries or damage suffered from risks he or she knows of and has voluntarily assumed

Front 29

example of assumption of risk

Back 29

signing waiver to skydive

Front 30

contributory negligence

Back 30

a rule in tort law that completely bars the plaintiff from recovering any damages if the damage suffered is partly the plaintiff's own fault

Front 31

comparative negligence

Back 31

a rule in tort law that reduces the plaintiff's recovery in proportion to the plaintiff's degree of fault, rather than barring recovery completely

Front 32

Res Ipsa Loquitor

Back 32

doctrine under which negligence may be inferred simply because an event occurred, if it is the type of event that would not occur in the absence of negligence

Front 33

Negligence per se

Back 33

an action or failure to act in violation of a statutory requirement

Front 34

Good Samaritan

Back 34

stipulating that persons who provide emergency services to someone in peril cannot be sued for negligence

Front 35

Dram Shop Act

Back 35

state statute that imposes liability on the owners of bars and taverns for injuries resulting from accidents caused by intoxicated persons when they contributed to the intoxication

Front 36

Appropriation

Back 36

use of another person's identity without the permission or benefit of the use

Front 37

false light

Back 37

published info that places a person in false light

Front 38

private facts

Back 38

certain aspects of a persons life that should not be disclosed in a public setting by anyone other than the individual

Front 39

Plaintiff must establish 4 elements for intrusion

Back 39

1. defendant must, without authorization, intentionally invade private affairs

2. the invasion must be offensive to a reasonable person

3. matter must involve a private matter

4. must cause mental anguish or suffering

Front 40

defamation

Back 40

wrongfully hurting a person's good reputation to a 3rd party

Front 41

slander

Back 41

defamation in oral form

Front 42

libel

Back 42

violating duty through writing or some other press

Front 43

Privileged Communications (absolute)

Back 43

statements made in a courtroom by attorneys and judges, government officials during legislative debate

Front 44

Privileged Communications (qualified)

Back 44

statements made in good faith to those who have legitimate interest in the communication

Front 45

actual malice

Back 45

knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard to the truth