Lhc-Law Final Set 7

Front 1

defednat's conduct is priviliged

Back 1

if it furthers an interst of such social importance that the law grants immunity from tort liabilty for damage to others (examples: self-defense, defense of property)

Front 2

bodily contact is offesnive

Back 2

if it would offend a reasonable person's sense of dignity

Front 3

assult

Back 3

is more mental than physical intrusion---compensation for fright and humiliation

Front 4

not false imprisonment if

Back 4

person is merely obstructing a person's freedom ov movement so long as a reasonable alt. ext is available

Front 5

elements of a defamation actsion

Back 5

1. false and defamatory stmt. cocnernign another
2. an unprivilieged publication (communication) to a third party
3. depending on the status of the defendant, negligence or recklessness on her part i knowing or failing to ascertain the falsity of the stmt.
4. proof of special harm caused by the publication

Front 6

absolute priviliege

Back 6

protects the defednat regardless of his motive or intent, has been confined to those few situations hwere public policy clearly favors complete freedom of speech

Front 7

conditional privilege

Back 7

depennds on proper use of the privilige-a person has a conditional privilege to publish defamatory matter to rptect her own legitimate interests or, in some cases, the interes of another
-forfeited by a puhblisher who acts in an excessive manner w/o probabl cause or for an improper purpose

Front 8

consitutional privelge

Back 8

-extended to deamatory and false stmts. about public officals/figures so long as it is done w/o malice.
-malice is not ill will but clear and convincing proof of the pbulisher's knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of the truth
-if defamation suti brought by private person-plaintiff must prove stmts. are with malice or negligence

Front 9

invasion of privacy (4 parts)

Back 9

1. appropriation of a person's name or likeness
2. unreasonable intrusion on the seclusion of another
3. unreasonable public disclosure of private facts
4. unreasonable publicity that places another in a flase light in the pbulic eye

Front 10

public disclores of p rivate facts applies only to

Back 10

private, not public, info about an individual; unlike instrusion, it requires publicity

Front 11

defenses of absolute, conditional, constituional privilege

Back 11

apply to publication of any matter that is an invasion of privay to the same extent that such defenses apply to defmation

Front 12

three torts comprise the misues of legal procedure

Back 12

malicious prosecution, wrongful civil proceedings, and abuse of process.

Front 13

malicious prosecution and wrongful civil proceedings impose liabilyt for damgaes caused by

Back 13

imporperly brough proceedings, includign harm to reputuation, credit, or standing; emotiaonl diestress; and the expenses incurred in defending agisnt the wrongfully brouhght lawsuit

Front 14

abuse of process

Back 14

consists of suing a legal proceedign (criminal or civil) to accopmlish a purpose for which the proceeding is not designed

Front 15

intentaional harm to property includes the torts of

Back 15

1. trespass to real property
2. nuisance
3. trespass to personal peropty
4. conversion

Front 16

trespass to real property if he intentailnally

Back 16

1. enters or remains on land in the posession of another
2. cuases a thing or a third person to so enter or remain
3. fails to remove from the land a thing that he is under a duty to remove

Front 17

liability is limited to instances in which the trespasser

Back 17

1. dispossesses the other of th eproperty
2. substantially imparis the condition, quality, or value of the preoperty
3. deprives the posessor of use of the peroprty for a substnaitl time

Front 18

all conversions are

Back 18

trespasses, but not all trespasses are conversions. conversion may consist of the intentialn destruction of personal property or the use of th peroperty in an unauthorized manner

Front 19

disparagement most commonly invovles

Back 19

intentainoally flase stmts. that cast doub ton another's right of ownership in or on the quality of another's property or prudcts.

Front 20

basis of liability for negligence

Back 20

failure to exercise resaonable care under the circumstances for the safety of anohte perons or his proerty, which faiulre proximately causes injury to such person or dmage to his property or both

Front 21

strict liabilty isn't based on negligence or intent of the defednatnt but rather on

Back 21

the nature of the activity in which he is engaging

Front 22

breach of duty of care

Back 22

that alegal duty required the defednat to conform to the std. of conduct established for the protectinof others and that the defendant failed to conform to that std.

Front 23

factors considered for breach of duty of care

Back 23

1. prob. that the harm would occur
2. gravity or seriuosness of the resulting harm
3. social utilty of the conduct creating the risk
4. cost o f takning precuatinos that would hvae reduced the risk

Front 24

proximate cuase

Back 24

that the defendant's failure to conform otthe required std. of conduct proximatle cuased ht e injury and harm the plaintiff sustained

Front 25

action for negligence consists of 3 elemetns each of which the plaintiff msut prove

Back 25

1. breahc of duyty of care
2. prxoimate cuase
3. injury

Front 26

injury

Back 26

that the injury and harm is of a type protected against the defednat's negligent conduct

Front 27

righ to fposessors of land to use that land for their own benefit and enjoyment is limited by

Back 27

their duty to do so in a reasonable manner

Front 28

public invitee

Back 28

person who is invited to enter or remain on land as a member of the public for a purpose for which the land is held open tot hepublic-public parks, pools.

Front 29

businesss vistor

Back 29

person invited to enter or reamin on premises for a purpose directlyor indirectly oconcernign business dealings with the possessor of hte land

Front 30

but for test not useful when

Back 30

two or more forces, each of which is sufficient to bring about the harm in question, are activley operating-use substnatial factor test to resolve

Front 31

substantial factor test

Back 31

stating that negligent conduct is a legal cause of harm to anothre if the conduct is a substantialf actorr in bringingn about the harm

Front 32

modified comparative negligence

Back 32

plintiff recovers as in pure comparative neligence unless her contribuotry negignece was = to or > than defednat, in which case plaintiff recovers nothing

Front 33

implied assumption of the risk

Back 33

plintiff fvoluntarily proceeds to encoutner akown danger

Front 34

3rd restattement of torts: approprtionment liabilty

Back 34

no longer a defense that the plaintiff was aware of rsik and voluntarily coonfronted it. but if plaintiff's conduct in teh faceof a kown risk is unreasonable it might constitute contributory negligence, thereby reducing the plaintiff's recovery under comparative ngliegince

Front 35

activies that give rise to strict liabilty

Back 35

1. perofrmign abnormally dangerous actcivities
2. keepig animals
3. selling defective, unreasonably dangerous products

Front 36

3 exceptions to rule of trespassing animals

Back 36

1. keepers of cats and gos are liable only for negligence-unless statute/ordinance impose strict liabilty
2. not strictly liable for animals straying from a highway -owner may be liablie for negligence if he fails to control them peroperly
3. some farm animals not strictly liable for harm caused by their trespass that are allowed to graze freely

Front 37

liabilty of manufactuers and sellers of goods for a defective porouct or for its failure to perform adequatlybased on one or more of the following

Back 37

1. negligence,
2. misprepresntation
3. violation of stuatorty duty
4. warranty
5. strict liabily in tort

Front 38

in brinign a warranty action, buyer msut prove that

Back 38

1. warranty existed
2. warranty has been breached
3. the breach of the warranty proximatley cuased the loss suffered
4. notice of the breach of warranty was given to the seleer

Front 39

warranty of title

Back 39

serller implicty warrants 1. that the title conveyed is goods and transfer rightful
2. that the goods are subject to no secuirty interest orother lien(a claim on property by another for payment of debt)

Front 40

in order for express warranty to be created

Back 40

underrtaking must become or be made part of the basis of the bargin

Front 41

affirmation fofact/promise or sample

Back 41

one way that seller may create express warranty.

Front 42

affirmations of value of goods or stmts. saying seller's opionon or recommendation

Back 42

doesn't create a warranty=puffery.

Front 43

seller who's an exper and who gives an opion as ssuch

Back 43

may be liable for breach of warranty

Front 44

seller can create express wrarnty by use of

Back 44

description of the goods tha tbecomes a part of the basis of the bargain.
-seller expressly warrantst that the goods shall conform to the edescription

Front 45

implied warranty of fitness for a particular puprpose doesn't require

Back 45

any specific stmt by the seller. it requires only taht the seller know that the buyer, in selecting aproduct for her specific purpose, is realying on the seller's expertise

Front 46

all implied warranites are ecluded by expressions like

Back 46

"as is" or "with all faults" or other language plaingly calling the buyer's attntion to the exclusio of warranties

Front 47

if buyer inspects the goods before entering the contract

Back 47

implied warranties do not apply to defects that are apparent on examinaitino

Front 48

Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

Back 48

-to protect purchasers of CPGs from deception and to make sure they are adequatly informed about warrnities

Front 49

horizontal privity

Back 49

extends to any natural person in family/household. and is reasonable that person would use CPG.