Torts

Front 1

What was the point of Garratt?

Back 1

Case stating intent is knowledge to substantial certainty or purpose

Front 2

What was important from Caudle v. Betts?

Back 2

Extended Liability Rule: Defendant's liability for the resulting harm extends, as in most other cases of intentional torts, to consequences which the defendant did not intend, and could not reasonably have foreseen, upon the obvious basis that it is better for unexpected losses to fall upon the intentional wrongdoer than upon the innocent victim

Front 3

What are the three levels of intent as it relates to battery?

Back 3

Contact, Harmful or Offensive Contact, Specific Harmful or Offensive Contact

Front 4

Davis Case

Back 4

Case exemplifying doctrine of transferred intent in re third parties, note can also be transferred intent between torts, LA Citizen case did not recognize the latter

Front 5

Elements of Battery

Back 5

1) Voluntary Act
2) Intent
3) Harmful or offensive contact
4) Lack of consent (sometimes affirmative defense)
5) Technical battery possible

Front 6

Leichtman Case

Back 6

Case emphasizing that one who is present and encourages or incites commission of a battery by words can be equally liable as a principal, also vicarious liability of employer for acts of employees

Front 7

What is vicarious liability as applied to the employer employee relationship

Back 7

Employer can be held liable for the acts of employees that occur within the course and scope of their employment

Front 8

Damages for battery

Back 8

Punitive damages and compensatory damages

Front 9

Loss of consortium

Back 9

Usually not a direct claim, can recover for four s's
1) Sex
2) Society
3) Services
4) Support

Front 10

Funeral Services by Gregory

Back 10

Case showing that mere possible damages without intent cannot constitute battery

Front 11

Mere exposure cases- mere exposure to disease does not constitute intent for battery

Back 11

Funeral Services, Neal

Front 12

Elements of Assault

Back 12

1) Voluntary Act
2) Intent
3) Apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact
4) Lack of consent (sometimes affirmative defense)

Front 13

Dickens v. Puryear

Back 13

Case exemplifying assault must be imminent threat, mere words do not constitute assault

Front 14

Neal v. Neal

Back 14

Case exemplifying alienation of affections as a derivative tort claim

Front 15

Elements of False Imprisonment

Back 15

1) voluntary act
2) intent
3) Complete confinement or restraint of plaintiff within boundaries
4) Awareness of confinement or actual harm
5) Absence of privelege

Front 16

Parvi v. Kingston

Back 16

Case exemplifying must be aware of confinement at time of confinement, not later, privilege of imprisonment is destroyed if the act is done for any purpose other than the protection or advancement of the interest in question

Front 17

Elements of IIED

Back 17

1) Voluntary Act
2) Intent or Recklessness
3) Outrageous Conduct
4) Severe Emotional Distress
5) Causation- no technical tort

Front 18

Markers of conduct found to be outrageous in IIED

Back 18

1) Imbalance of power/authority
2) Vulnerability of victim
3) Repetition
4) Escalation

Front 19

White v. Monsanto

Back 19

Case where LA adopted IIED intentional tort, said conduct must be so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Conduct which might otherwise be outrageous may be privileged under certain circumstances, such as the workplace. Unless the actor has knowledge of the other's particular susceptibility to emotional distress, the actor's conduct should be judged in the light of the effect such conduct would ordinarily have on a person of ordinary sensibilities.

Front 20

What are the recoverable damages in a survival action?

Back 20

Whatever the person could have recovered if they sued during their lifetime

Front 21

What are the recoverable damages in a wrongful death action?

Back 21

4 S's= loss of support, services, society, sex

Front 22

Elements of trespass to land

Back 22

1) Voluntary act
2) Intent to enter land
3) Entry on to land

Front 23

7 intentional torts

Back 23

IIED, Battery, Assault, FI, TTC, Conversion, TTL

Front 24

Herrin

Back 24

Case showing trespass to land can be on, above, or beneath the surface of the earth that belongs to plaintiff

Front 25

Elements of TTC

Back 25

1) Voluntary Act
2) Intent
3) Interference with Property
4) Actual Damages

Front 26

Elements of Conversion

Back 26

1) Voluntary Act
2) Intent
3) Exercise of dominion or control over property (Almost or do completely destroy value of thing to original owner)

Front 27

Damages of TTC and Conversion

Back 27

1) TTC- loss of value in property, punitive damages
2) Conversion- value of thing at time it was stolen

Front 28

AOL

Back 28

Case that exemplifies TTC can affect any property of the plaintiff's, so long as the use by the defendant partially or fully destroys the value to the plaintiff

Front 29

Dual Drilling

Back 29

Case that exemplifies the idea that defendant can be liable for conversion if he knew or should have known that the property belonged to someone else and fails to ascertain the identity of the true owner

Front 30

Defenses to Intentional Torts

Back 30

1) Consent
2) Necessity
3) Defense of Self/Others/Property
4) Justification
5) Merchant's Privilege (FI)

Front 31

Defenses to Negligence

Back 31

1) Assumption of the risk
2) Comparative fault/contributory negligence

Front 32

Fricke

Back 32

Case exemplifying plaintiff can consent to whatever harmful or offensive contact that defendant desired or believed to a substantial certainty would befall plaintiff

Front 33

Consent is _____, unless _______

Back 33

Bar recovery,
1) duress
2) fraud
3) material mistake as to consent
4) conduct exceeds scope of consent
5) consent withdrawn
6)lack of capacity of consent giver

Front 34

Requirements of assumption of the risk

Back 34

1) actual knowledge of the danger
2) understood and appreciated risks associated with the danger
3) voluntarily exposed self to these risks

Front 35

Cole case

Back 35

Case exemplifying consent can be implied by behavior, some activities inherently risky so you consent to forseeable risks, consent can be withdrawn when activities plaintiff consented to exceed the scope of the initial consent

Front 36

Louisiana rule regarding consent to illegal activities

Back 36

Consent effective to illegal activities- bars recovery to consenting persons

Front 37

Necessity Defense

Back 37

Two types- public and private necessity

Public necessity protects the public- no liability, no damages, complete defense

Private necessity protects private interests- only a partial defense, liable for actual damage caused

Front 38

What are the general requirements for self-defense

Back 38

1) Showing that there was an actual or reasonably apparent threat to the claimant's safety requiring and justifying foce,
2) Force used cannot be excessive in degree or kind
3) Does not justify retaliation or revenge
4) Usually not triggered by threats and insults alone

Front 39

Factors to determine the reasonableness of action of the party being attacked in a self-defense claim

Back 39

1) character and reputation of the attacker
2) beliigerence of the attacker
3) a large difference in size and strength between the parties,
4) overt act by the attacker
5) threats of serious bodily harm
6) impossibility of a peaceful retreat

Front 40

McDonald Case

Back 40

Case exemplifying although defendant has no duty to retreat, use of force is a more compelling case if the defendant takes other measures (in this case calling the cops etc.) to deter the plaintiff before using force against them

Front 41

The aggressor doctrine is...

Back 41

No longer valid in Louisiana