Legal Environment Of Business

Front 1

a CIVIL wrong that interferes with one’s property or person; A civil or noncriminal interference with one’s property that is NOT a breach of contract law and therefore not governed by contract law

Back 1

TORT

Front 2

3 Types of Torts:

Back 2

1. Intentional
2. Negligence
3. Strict Liability

Front 3

the desire to bring about certain results; bringing about results that are “substantially likely” to result form an act; Intent must be there

Back 3

INTENT

Front 4

Types of Intentional Torts:

Back 4

1. Assault and Battery
2. Invasion of Privacy
3. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Duress
4. False Imprisonment
5. Trespass
6. Conversion
7. Defamation
8. Fraud
9. Common Law Business Torts

Front 5

placing another person in immediate apprehension for his or her PHYSICAL safety

Back 5

ASSAULT

Front 6

illegal touching of another; touching without justification

Back 6

BATTERY

Front 7

emotional equivalent to physical battery; Outrageous and Intentional conduct that carries the STRONG PROBABILITY of causing mental distress to the person at whom it is directed

Back 7

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF MENTAL DISTRESS

Front 8

Van Stan v. Fancy Colours

Back 8

-about Intentional Infliction of Mental Distress
-Terminated Van Stan’s employment
-She files suit for intentional infliction of mental distress
-Failed to establish Defendant’s conduct was OUTRAGEOUS, INTENT, and that DISTRESS was indeed inflicted

Front 9

1) appropriating a person’s name 2) intrusion upon one’s physical solitude 3) Public disclosure of objectionable information

Back 9

INVASION OF PRIVACY

Front 10

intentional, unjustified confinement of a non-consenting person who knows of the confinement

Back 10

FALSE IMPRISONMENT

Front 11

a shopkeeper has the right to detain a person suspected of shoplifting

Back 11

SHOPKEEPER’S PRIVLEGE

Front 12

Adams v. Zayre

Back 12

-about Shopkeeper’s Privilege
-Zayre detained Adams and her daughter
-radio was not found
-took 30 minutes
-shouldn’t have taken that long

Front 13

enter a person’s house without permission; interfering with a person’s property; remedy is usually an Injunction; Noise pollution= trespassing

Back 13

TRESPASSING

Front 14

the wrongful exercise of power and control over resources belonging to another

Back 14

CONVERSION

Front 15

publication of untrue statements about a person which damages reputation and character

Back 15

DEFAMATION

Front 16

Signal Const. v. Stanbury:

Back 16

-plaintiff was fired and applied for another job
-future employer got reference from Signal Const.
-reference was negative and made false assertions
-sued for defamation and won

Front 17

the intentional misrepresentation of a material fact

Back 17

FRAUD

Front 18

deceptive acts designed to hide information, mislead, avoid suspicion or prevent further inquiry

Back 18

CONCEALMENT

Front 19

mere silence

Back 19

NONDISCLOSURE

Front 20

type of tort that embraces different kinds of activities that involve intentional interference with business relations

Back 20

COMMON LAW BUSINESS TORTS

Front 21

2nd major area of Tort; Unreasonable behavior that causes injury

Back 21

NEGLIGENCE

Front 22

Elements of Negligence

Back 22

1. DUTY must exist between plaintiff and defendant
2. BREACH of that duty must occur
3. CAUSATION connecting the duty and breach of duty to the injuries
4. INJURY in fact

Front 23

Iannelli v. Burger King

Back 23

-Businesses and DUTY
-Generally there is no DUTY to provide a safe environment to customers
-Foreseeable Danger
-If RISK or INJURY was reasonably foreseeable, then a DUTY existed

Front 24

The Reasonable Man:

Back 24

1. Perception
2. Memory
3. Experience (gravity, fire, water)

Front 25

Sidebar 8.6: Medical Malpractice

Back 25

-“Reasonable Professional”

Front 26

behavior that breaches the duty of care a defendant owes a plaintiff

Back 26

UNREASONABLE BEHAVIOR

Front 27

class of negligence which can allow PUNITIVE damages for the plaintiff

Back 27

WILLFUL and WANTON

Front 28

Defendant’s negligent action must in fact be the cause of the plaintiff’s injury; each tortfeasor is “jointly and severely” liable”; Decided by the Jury

Back 28

CAUSATION IN FACT

Front 29

Legal Cause; limits actor’s liability to consequences that could reasonably be foreseen to have resulted from the act; Injury must be caused DIRECTLY by defendant’s negligence

Back 29

PROXIMATE CAUSATION

Front 30

Sidebar 8.7:

Back 30

-Proximate Causation
-Explosion on Long Island Railroad
-Woman injured by falling scale
-sues railroad
-Court finds NO PROXIMATE CAUSE
-wasn’t FORESEEABLE

Front 31

Negligence of the Plaintiff that contributes to injury and at common law bars any recovery from the defendant (black or white)

Back 31

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE

Front 32

No chance for recovery if plaintiff had ANY fault in the accident

Back 32

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE

Front 33

Fault allocated among parties; rate of recovery

Back 33

COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

Front 34

Plaintiff barred from recovery if 50% or more responsible for the accident

Back 34

PROPORTIONAL COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

Front 35

Plaintiff WILLINGLY and KNOWINGLY undertaking an activity that is made dangerous by negligent acts by others (sporting events)

Back 35

ASSUMPTION OF RISK

Front 36

3 Categories of Assumption of Risk:

Back 36

1. Plaintiff in advance; (ex. Release form)
2. Plaintiff voluntarily enters a situation (ex. Getting in car with bad brakes)
3. Plaintiff uses hazardous device (ex. gun)

Front 37

liability imposed by law on a person even though he/she has not been guilty of negligence or wanton and willful wrongdoing; situations where a statutory duty is imposed

Back 37

STRICT LIABILITY

Front 38

COMMERCIAL sale of an unreasonably dangerous and defective product; will be held to strict liability for any injuries product causes

Back 38

STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY

Front 39

strict liability upon Tavern owners for injuries to 3rd parties caused by their intoxicated patrons (includes house parties)

Back 39

DRAM SHOP ACT

Front 40

3 Types of Compensatory Damanges :

Back 40

1. Past and Future medical
2. Past and Future economic loss
3. Past and Future pain and suffering

Front 41

damages designed to punish the defendant; Tortfeasor’s intent was MALICIOUS, EVIL, fraudulent, willful and wanton; most SEVERE torts

Back 41

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

Front 42

alternative to litigation for Employees injured in the course of employment

Back 42

WORKER’S COMPENSATION

Front 43

Pee v. AVM, Inc.

Back 43

-repetitive trauma injury incurred at work
-Court ruled the injury was UNEXPECTED and UNINTENDED
-Worker’s Compensation