Torts - Intentional Torts

Front 1

What are the 7 major int’l torts?

Back 1

Battery, assault, false imprisonment, IIED, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, conversion.
Mnemonic: FITTED CAB (FI, T/L, T/C, ED, Con, Ass, Batt)

Front 2

What does intent refer to?

Back 2

Either a person’s desire that certain consequences result from his actions or his knowledge that those results are substantially certain to occur as a result of his actions.

Front 3

What is the difference b/w negligence and intent?

Back 3

Negl - likelihood of result - d/n want result to occur nor is it certain to do so - creates a foreseeable risk of harm.
Intent - desire for a certain result to occur - want a result to occur or know with substantial certainty that the result will occur whether you want it to or not.

Front 4

What is the difference b/w intent and motive?

Back 4

Intent - desired consequences of an act
Motive - reasons for desiring the consequences

Front 5

What is an act, for purposes of int’l torts?

Back 5

Voluntary muscular movement - liability depends on an act - d/n encompass involuntary movements.

Front 6

What is transferred intent?

Back 6

Arises when you intent to commit a tort against one person, but injury to another results instead - intent w/b deemed to be transferred from your intended victim to the actual one.
FIT BAT (FI, T/L, Bat, Ass, T/C)

Front 7

M pushes D into a catapult and springs him at G. Has D committed an act for int’l tort purposes?

Back 7

No. It is M who committed the act, not D - act requires a voluntary movement. D c/n be liable to G.

Front 8

KG is preparing coffee for dinner guests, G and MW. KG suffers epileptic seizure and accidentally spills poison in coffee. Did KG perform an act for int’l tort purposes?

Back 8

No - require voluntary movement - mind m/ control action.

Front 9

What is battery?

Back 9

Int’l harmful or offensive bodily contact. D act, intended to create a harmful or offensive contact, m/ directly/indirectly bring about the harmful or offensive contact.

Front 10

What is needed for assualt?

Back 10

Intent - D intended to cause apprehension of imminent harmful-or-offensive contact.
Causation - causal connection b/w D act and P apprehension.
Imminent - apprehension of immediate contact
Apprehension of harmful or offensive contact - P has a belief that if she d/n take action, a harmful or offensive contact will soon occur.
Lack of Consent - defense to assault.

Front 11

For an assault to occur, d/ the victim h/ to be afraid?

Back 11

No - victim m/ apprehend harmful or offensive contact, but he d/n/h to be afraid of it.

Front 12

What is false imprisonment?

Back 12

Int’l confinement of another to a bounded area where the P is either aware of the confinement or is harmed by it.

Front 13

For false imprisonment, m/ the restraint be physical?

Back 13

No, physical restraint is the classic form of FI, but restraint can take the form of threats of force if the P tries to leave or duress.

Front 14

Can refusing to allow someone into a place be FI?

Back 14

No, requires int’l confining someone to a bounded area, not keeping someone out of a place.

Front 15

If D d/n lock a person in, but threatens to harm them if they try to leave, is that FI?

Back 15

Yes, confinement c/b accomplished by threatening the P with harm if he tries to escape.

Front 16

Is moral or social pressure enough to satisfy confinement element of FI?

Back 16

No.

Front 17

Are D liable for any damages incurred while P is trying to escape a FI?

Back 17

Yes, liable for damages suffered in the course of a reasonable escape.

Front 18

What is false arrest?

Back 18

Wrongful confinement under color of legal authority. Requires P to prove:
1. That D asserted the legal authority to detain P
2. That P believed that D had the authority to detain him
3. That P submitted to D authority against his will
4. That D in fact lacked legal authority for the detention.

Front 19

What are the elements of IIED?

Back 19

Int’l or reckless infliction, by extreme and outrageous conduct, of severe emotional or mental distress, even in the absence of physical harm. P m/ show:
1. Act - extreme and outrageous conduct by D (petty insults or annoyances w/n suffice)
2. Intent - D intent to cause P to suffer severe emotional distress
3. Causation - causal connection b/w wrongful conduct and emotional distress
4. Damages - physical harm i/n requires, but the emotional harm m/b severe.
DICE (D, I, C, Extreme conduct)
Where a third person is present during outrageous conduct, and suffers distress, that 3rd person m/b able to recover.

Front 20

Can mere words suffice for a claim of IIED?

Back 20

Yes - however, mere insults generally a/n actionable - words w/h to be extremely outrageous and go beyond the bounds of decency, such as:
- D tells P that P’s child is dead
- D, a collection agent, repeatedly phones P late at night and threatens to run a newspaper ad labeling P a deadbeat if P d/n pay.

Front 21

Under what circumstances c/ you recover for outrageous conduct at someone else?

Back 21

1. P was present during outrageous conduct
2. P is closely related to X
3. D knew of P presence and knew that distress to P was substantially certain to result from D conduct.

Front 22

In what circumstances is the degree of extreme conduct lowered?

Back 22

1. When D knows that the victim is a member of a group with heightened sensitivities
2. When D knows of the victim’s special sensitivities, even if sensitivity w/n otherwise be obvious
3. When D is a public utility and the victim is a customer - D w/b liable for gross insults or indecent language which w/n otherwise be the source of an emotional distress claim.

Front 23

When an act is only reckless, not intentional, can a person sue for IIED?

Back 23

Probably, even where conduct is not int’l, most ct hold that a claim for IIED will lie.

Front 24

What is transferred intent doctrine?

Back 24

Arises when you intend to commit a tort against one person, but injury to another results instead - intent is deemed to be transferred from your intended victim to the actual one fr purposes of establishing an int’l tort.
Only applicable for FI, T/L, Batt, Ass, and T/C, NOT EEID.

Front 25

What are the elements of trespass to land?

Back 25

What are the elements of trespass to chattels?
Int’l interfering with personal property in someone else’s possession. P m/ show:
1. Act - that D took a voluntary act which interfered with P right of possession in the chattel - either a dispossession or an intermeddling.
2. Intent - D intended to perform the act which brought about the interference.
3. Possession - P either possessed the chattel or h/ immediate right to possess it
4. Damages - if merely an intermeddling, P m/show actual damages - if dispossession, actual damages d/n/h/b proven, mere taking of possession is considered sufficient damage.
PAID

Front 26

What are the elements of conversion?

Back 26

Int’l interference with the P personal property that is so substantial that its fair to require the D to pay the property’s full value. P m/ prove:
1. Dominion and control - D subst interfered with P right of possession in personal property, in a sufficiently serious fashion as to justify ordering D to pay the property’s full value.
2. Intent - D intended to perform the interfering act.
3. Possession - P was either in possession of the chattel or had immediate right to possess it
DIP

Front 27

What is the difference b/w conversion and T/C?

Back 27

Seriousness of damage.
Conversion - damage to personal property is so egregious as to merit D paying its full value.

Front 28

What are the 9 major defenses to int’l torts?

Back 28

Consent, self-defense, defense of others, defense of land/chattels, recapture of chattels, shoplifters - detention to investigate, necessity, legal authority, discipline.

Front 29

Is mistake by itself a defense to int’l torts?

Back 29

No

Front 30

What are the types of consent?

Back 30

Express consent
Implied in fact consent - P makes an objective manifestation that D reasonably interprets as consent, it applies regardless of P subjective intent.
Consent implied by law in emergency situations - implied if P is unable to consent, a reasonable person w/ consent , no indication that P w/n consent.

Front 31

When is consent ineffective as a defense?

Back 31

1. When obtained through duress
2. When obtained through fraud
3. When P d/n /h capacity to consent
4. When the act exceeded the scope of consent
5. When consent was to a criminal act.

Front 32

What does the privilege of self-defense entitle you to do?

Back 32

Use reasonable force to prevent threatened harmful/offensive contact or confinement. Issue surrounding self-defense is normally whether your response was reasonable in light of the perceived threat to you.

Front 33

What are the factors of a self-defense claim?

Back 33

Amount of force allowed -only what reasonably appears necessary to protect yourself against the threat.
Deadly force - you can use deadly force only if you reasonably believe the other person is about to kill your or seriously injure you - force intended or likely to cause death or serious harm.
Effect of provocation - a/n privileged to use self-defense to respond to mere verbal threats. But if the words are accompanied by a physical act threatening imminent physical violence, you are entitled to self-defense.
Duty to retreat before you use force - d/n/h to retreat under any circumstances.
Limits on self-defense - c/n use excessive force and you c/n use self-defense as retaliation. C/n use self-defense once danger h/ passed.
Effect of mistake - allowed to make reasonable mistake - can still defend on grounds of self-defense, even if mistaken about threat or the need to use force as long as mistake was reasonable.
Effect of injuring others - liable to anyone you intentionally injury.

Front 34

Under what circumstances are you entitled to use privilege of defense of others to avoid liability?

Back 34

You can use reasonable force to protect third parties who are threatened with any kind of immediate harm, like rape or serious bodily injury - only entitled to use reasonable force. If ostensible victim i/n entitled to employ self-defense, you c/n use force on his behalf.

Front 35

When are you entitled to use force to defend property?

Back 35

1. The intrusion w/n privileged
2. Reasonably believe force is necessary to prevent or terminate the intrusion
3. Demand that the intruder desist before you use force
4. Use only as much force as appears to be reasonably necessary to protect the property.

Front 36

When are you entitled to use force to defend property?

Back 36

1. The intrusion w/n privileged
2. Reasonably believe force is necessary to prevent or terminate the intrusion
3. Demand that the intruder desist before you use force
4. Use only as much force as appears to be reasonably necessary to protect the property.
Mistake - entitled to a reasonable mistake as to the necessity of using force
Deadly force - never use deadly force just to protect property
Privileged intrusion - not entitled to use force against
Exposing intruder to greater danger - c/n put in position of unreasonably physical danger.

Front 37

Can you use force to recover goods?

Back 37

Yes, as long as:
Entitled to immediate possession of the property
Made a demand for its return
Acted promptly under the circumstances
Person who has property is one who is at fault.
No defense of mistake - one who is attempting recapture is an aggressor.

Front 38

When do you have the right to enter someone else’s land to get your chattels back?

Back 38

If it is not your fault you were dispossessed, you have a privilege to enter the land at a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner to recapture your property but have to pay for any damages unless goods got there due to LO fault.
If it is your fault, no privilege to enter land unless the entry is necessary to prevent serious harm to people or to the chattel itself.

Front 39

What privilege d/ a shopkeeper have to detain someone to investigate for possible shoplifting?

Back 39

M/b reasonable grounds to suspect that the person detained actually took s/t
M/ occur in the store or in its immediate vicinity
Only reasonable, nondeadly force c/b used to detain the person
Investigation m/b conducted in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable period of time.

Front 40

What are the necessity defenses?

Back 40

Public - actions taken to avert a public disaster
Private - action taken to protect any person from death or serious harm or to protect specific land or chattels from injury.

Front 41

What circumstances allow public necessity as defense to trespass or conversion?

Back 41

When it seems reasonably necessary to avert a public disaster - complete privilege, not liable for any damage to property that you cause as a result of averting such a disaster.

Front 42

What circumstances allow private necessity as defense?

Back 42

When conduct was reasonably necessary to protect any person from death or serious harm, or to protect land or chattels from injury.
Mistake - d/n negate the privilege as long as reasonable.
Limited - liable for any resulting damage to P property, and harm you prevented m/ outweigh the harm you caused.

Front 43

When can discipline be a defense?

Back 43

C/ use reasonable force to preserve order if a parent, teacher or military supervisor. Force m/b reasonable.

Front 44

For battery, assault, FI and emotional distress (personal int’l torts) what are the damages available?

Back 44

Nominal - symbolic damages for situations where the P d/n suffer any actual damages
General - covers noneconomic damages flowing naturally from wrongful conduct
Specific - covers identifiable economic losses
Punitive - d/n compensate P, serve to punish D and make an example out of him.

Front 45

What damages are available for trespass to land?

Back 45

Any actual harm caused to the land or the occupants. If trespasser d/n cause any actual harm, P w/b able to recover nominal damages b/c P c/ prevail in trespass claim w/o having to prove actual damages.