• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

80 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Define Intent
The purpose design or desire to cause... or having substantial knowledge that doing something will result in a particular outcome.
Intent v. Good Faith
One's good faith in committing an act is irrelevant to meeting the basic elements of an intentional tort.
When are the mentally ill and children capable of forming intent?
In general, children and the mentally disabled can be held liable if the plaintiff can establish the requisite intent.

In general, one's mental illness is not relevant to his or her liability.
Does one's mistakes negate their intent?
No, one's good faith or lack of malice in performing an act does not negate the intent to do so.
Define Battery
A person is liable for battery if he intentionally causes a harmful or offensive contact of another or something so closely associated with another's body to be considered part of it.
What are the elements of Battery?

Harmful or Offensive Contact

Of another or something so closely associated with another's body.
Define Battery > Harmful Contact
Harmful contact:

Any physical impairment of the condition of another's body, or physical pain or illness, whether done directly or indirectly
Define Battery > Offensive Contact
Offensive contact:

An act is offensive if it goes beyond a reasonable person's sense of personal dignity.
Things to consider when determining whether an act is offensive (assault, battery).
Any history of relationship between the parties.

Whether the person was known to be super-sensitive.
Re: Battery

Provide an example of when a person need not be present to commit a battery.
Setting a wire out for a person, knowing that she will trip over it later.

Spiking someone's drink.
Re: Battery - Provide examples of things that would be so closely associated with a person's body to be considered part of it.
A cane, a plate they are holding. Their hat or jacket.
Define Assault
A person is liable for assault if they intentionally cause a reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact on the part of another.
What are the elements of assault.

Reasonable Apprehension

Imminent harmful or offensive contact.
Define Assault > imminent harmful or offensive contact
Imminent does not mean immediate. Simply that one is close enough to striking distance that she can reach the other almost at once, or that she can make a weapon discharge in a very short period of time.
Define Assault > reasonable apprehension
A person must cause the victim to expect that he is about to be touched unless stopped by the plaintiff's actions or by a third party or circumstance.
Discuss Assault > Threats
Mere words don't constitute assault unless paired together with other acts or circumstances to put the other in reasonable apprehension of harmful or offensive contact.

A person must have an apparent ability to carry out the threat in the very short term.

Future oriented threats generally don't count since a person could change their intent before doing the act.
Define False Imprisonment
A person is liable for false imprisonment if D intented through acts or threats to confine P against P's will and within boundaries established by D, this act directly or indirectly resulted in such confinement, and P was conscious of the confinement or was harmed by it.
What are the elements of False Imprisonment?

By Acts or Threats



Within set boundaries

P is aware of confinement or harmed by it.

Against P's will or without legal justification.
Define False Imprisonment > Threats or Acts
Like assault, one must have an apparent ability to back up the threat and future threats are not sufficient.

Includes threats to others, threats to take or hold personal property, or a perceived assertion of legal authority.
Discuss False Imprisonment > Confinement
Confinement space must have definite phsycical boundaries - blocking a path is not enough.

The size of the confinement can be expansive.

Once cannot be confine from entering a location - e.g. kept out of a ballpark, or store.
Discuss False Imprisonment > Knowledge of Confinement
A person must be aware that they are being confined or be harmed by it.

A person who is confined and doesn't realize it until later does not have a claim unless she was harmed.

Children who are kidnapped, regardless of their knowledge, are said to be harmed because the parents are harmed.
Define False Imprisonment > Reasonable Escape
A means of escape is unreasonable if P does not know about it or if it involved exposure to P, material harm to the clothing, or danger of substantial harm to another.

If P chooses to use an unreasonable escape and gets injured, D is not liable for the damages that have occurred as a result of the escape.
Define False Arrest:
A police officer who unlawfully arrests someone may be held liable for false arrest if the person is ultimately found not guilty for the criminal charges involved.

Also, a private citizen can be held liable for a false arrest if she helps an officer in an unlawful arrest as long as the citizen is aware that the arrest is unlawful.
Define Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
A person is liable for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress if he intentionally or recklessly acts in an extreme or outrageous manner in order to cause severe emotional distress to another.
Elements of IIED.
Intent or Reckless

Extreme or Outrageous Act


Severe Emotional Distress
Define IIED > Reckless
A person has acted reckless if she knows of the risk or knows of fact that would be obvious to a reasonable person in the actor's situation


she could have taken small measures to reduce or eliminate the risk but didn't.
Define IIED > Extreme and Outrageous
Conduct that is so outrageous in character and so extreme as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community

Does not include general vulgarities which amount to "mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities."
Discuss how racial slurs could be considered "extreme and outrageous" behavior in a claim for IIED.
Racial slurs, sexual comments, etc. are not enough to constitute outrageous behavior, unless they are considered with other conduct - continuous humiliation and embarrassment by reason of racial jokes, slurs, and comments made in the presence of coworkers and supervisors.
Describe the "Commons Carriers and Inkeepers" duty with IIED.
Common Carriers are held to a higher standard for Outrageous and Extreme behavior. Behavior that might fall below extreme in normal circumstances can be seen as extreme when done in a situation involving common carriers and inkeepers.
What constitutes Severe Emotional Distress?
Generally, a person must have a physical representation of their stress, and this representation must be reasonably severe. Simple crying, or the fact that a person is upset is not enough. Examples include combinations of missing days from work, depression, seeing a physician or psychologist, sleepless nights, vomiting, medications, etc.
Define Trespass to Land
A person is liable for trespass to land if he 1)intentionally enters the land in possession of another, or causes another person or object to do so 2) remains on land in possession of another, or 3) fails to remove an object from the possessors land which she is under a duty to remove.
What are the elements to Trespass to Land

To enter
OR Remain
OR leave an object

On land in possession of another.
Define Trespass to Land > Land
Land in possession of anothe ris considered infinite, expansive vertically, with limits on airspace to include that which is nearest to the ground.
What special privileges exists for Trespass to Land?
Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires public accommodation business who affect interstate commerce to serve customers without discrimination.

A private individual may control territory so large that it may be considered public for reasons of freedom of speech.
What rule governs intangible substances with regards to Trespass to Land?
Small particulates that flow onto and accumulate on land in possession of another can be trespass to land if some substantial damage to the land occurs as a result
Define Trespass to Chattel
A person is liable for trespass to chattel if she intentionally interferes with chattel in possession of another which results in 1)dispossession or deprivation of the use of the chattel 2) impairment of the condition, quality, or value of the chattel, or 3) harm to the person of the possessor of to persons or things which the possessor has a legally protected interest in.
What are the elements of Trespass to Chattel?
With Chattel in Possession of Another
Which results in: lack of use, lack of quality, or harm
Define Conversion.
A person is liable for conversion if he intentionally exercises control or dominion over a chattel in possession of another which so seriously interferes with another's right to control the property that it is fair to require him/her to pay the other the full value of the property.
What are the elements to Conversion

Exercise Control or Dominion

Another's Chattel

Seriously Interfere with Another's right to control the property

Fair that they should be required to replace it
Discuss ways a person could exercise dominion or control over another's property (re: conversion).
Acquiring Possession (stealing, buying from a thief)

Damaging or Altering


Withholding Possession

Using It
What factors affect the degree of interference with one's ownership or possession?
Extent and duration of actor's exercise in dominion or control

Actor's intent to assert a right inconsistent with the other's right of control.

Actor's good faith

Extend of resulting interference

Harm done to the chattel

Inconveniences and expense causes to the possessor
What general rule governs consent?
A person is privileged to act where another has consented to the conduct. Consent may be expressed or implied.
How does the court measure implied consent?
By using facts to determine what objective manifestations exist which would lead a defendant to believe that she had implied consent.
Describe Customary Consent.
If it would be customary for a reasonable person in the plaintiff's shoes to consent to something, then this can be taken as implied consent.

Example: A privilege might exist to cross a person's land to get to a public fishing hole.
What exceptions exist for granting consent when a person has a lack of capacity to consent (young child, intoxicated, unconscious, etc.)
During medical emergencies if all the following are met: 1)patient is incapacitated 2) immediate action is needed to save the life of the person or to remove them from harm 3)patient would likely consent if given the opportunity 4)a reasonable person would consent

Consent by relative

Court Order - may give consent if acts would save a person's life.
Define Scope of Consent
A person who goes beyond the scope of consent given can be held liable for the tort committed.
Discuss Professional Sports and Consent:
One's participation in professional sports does not constitute implied consent for intentional attacks or injuries outside the rules of the game.
Discuss consent provided because of a mistake in fact.
A person's mistake in giving consent because he didn't realize an obvious aspect of the transaction does not make the consent ineffective.
What exceptions exist for consent that was given based on a mistake of fact?
Mistakes in consent that have been induced by fraud vitiate the consent. Fraud may include leaving out information or lying.
What rule governs consent provided under duress?
Consent under duress depends on the immediacy and seriousness of the duress. Threats for future acts likely will not vitiate consent.
Define Self Defense
The defendant is privileged to use reasonable force to defend himself if a reasonable person in the defendant's situation would have believed that the use of physical force was immediately necessary to protect himself from another's unlawful conduct.
Does Self-Defense apply to Trespass to Chattel.
No, Self-Defense only applies to threats of harmful or offenseive contact to a person (thus only including false imprisonment, assault, battery, and negligence).
Must an actual danger exist for a person to use Self-Defense?
No, a person must only have a reasonable beleif that the force is neccessary to protect herself against battery, even though there is in fact no necessity.

Thus, a reasonable mistake can be made on the part of the actor as long as it is reasonable that she use such force.
Discuss provocation with regards to Self-Defense.
Provocation by words is not enough to justify self-defense force. Words plus the threat of force may be enough however - as in elements of assault.
Discuss one's duty to retreat prior to using Reasonable Force in Self-Defense.
The restatement definition suggests that a person should retreat from force as much as possible prior to using reasonable force in defense. Most courts, however, suggest that a person may use any force short of causing serious injury to protect themselves from harm.
Define Reasonable Force:
The force used must be reasonably necessary for protection against a threatened battery. Differences in size, age, relative strength, etc. can be used as factors in considering reasonable force.
Discuss one's liability if they injury a third person in self-defense of another.
The privilege associated with injuring a person in self-defense carries over to a third party who is injured by mistake while in the act of self-defense
Define Defense of Others
A person is privileged to use reasonable force to defend another against unlawful conduct when that person would be privileged to defend himself in the same situation.
Discuss one's liability when making a reasonable mistake in defending another.
Majority View: A person "steps into the shoes" of the person he is aiding. Thus if he helps the aggressor, he is also liable.

Minority View: A person may use reasonable force to defend another even when he is mistaken in his belief that the intervention is necessary - Restatement View.
Define Defense of Land
A person is justified to use reasonable force against another when the use of the force is necessary to prevent trespass on the person's property.
Define Recovery of Property
one who is wrongfully dispossessed of a chattel by force or fraud has the privilege to repossess the chattel with reasonable force through fresh pursuit, if demand has been provided under the circumstances.
Define Necessity:
A person is privileged to harm the property interest of another where it is necessary to do so in order to prevent great harm to third persons or to the defendant himself.
Define Authority of Law
A defendant is privileged to engage in otherwise tortious conduct if the defendant is authorized by law to act as he does.
Define Discipline
A parent or one who is deemed to stand in place of a parent may use reasonable force and restraint upon persons in their control.
Define Justification
Restraint or detention, reasonable under the circumstances and in time and manner, imposed for the purpose of preventing another from inflicting personal injuries or interfering with or damaging real or personal property in one's lawful possession or custody is lawful
Is a person privileged to eject persons who are authorized to be on their land?
No, one does not have privilege to use force against those who are authorized to use the land (e.g. telephone company operators)
What if any warning should be given before using one's privilege of Defense of Land
When an invasion is peaceful, the use of any force is considered unreasonable UNLESS a request has been made to leave the land.

No request is necessary if it is obvious that the request would be useless or if doing so would be unsafe.
Discuss using deadly force in protecting one's land.
A person may use deadly force only when protecting personal safety or her family, and only then when necessary.

A person may be justified in using deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent crime.
Discuss rigging mechanical devices to protect land.
Mechanical devices may be used only if the possessor of the land would be privileged to use a similar degree of force if she were present and acting herself.
What elements exists for a person's privilege to Recover Chattel
Wrongfully Possessed

By Force or Fraud

With Reasonable Force

During Fresh Pursuit

when Demand has been given, if safe and reasonable to do so
Define Recovery of Property > Fresh Pursuit
Prompt discovery of the dispossession and prompt and persistent efforts to recover the chattel
Is demand necessary before using force to recover a chattel?
Yes, although it is not necessary if giving demand for the chattel would be obviously dangerous or useless.
Describe the Shopkeeper's Privilege when recovering chattel.
The shopkeepers privilege allows a shopkeeper to detain a person for a reasonable investigation if they reasonably believe the person has stolen property. Reasonable force may only be used when demand has been given. In addition, the privilege generally extends to the outside of the store as well.
Describe Public Necessity
A defendant is privileged to act under public necessity defense when the defendant engages in otherwise tortious acts to avoid imminent public disasters.

A person will not received compensation from the individual doing the trespass, but may receive compensation from the government.
Describe Private Necessity
A defendant is privileged to act under the private necessity when defendant engages in otherwise tortious acts to protect the defendant or the defendant's property from harm. Even though the defendant's conduct is privileged, the defendant must pay for the actual harm caused by his trespass.
Is a person privileged to use reasonable force to eject someone from their land who is exercising their privilege of private necessity.
No, a person is not privileged to use any force against someone who is exercising a private necessity privilege.

Since a person will be compensated for any actual damages while allowing a necessary trespass to occur, she may not use any force to defeat the exercise of the privilege, and would be liable for any damages caused by preventing the privilege to occur.
Describe any limits for an individual exercising his privilege of Authority of Law while conducting an arrest with a valid warrant.
A public officer is liable if she goes beyond the scope of the warrant, causing damage

The public officer is liable if he makes a mistake of fact while executing the warrant - arrests the wrong person.
Describe the Authority of Law privilege for private citizens with regards to arrests made without a warrant.
A private citizen can arrest without a warrant to prevent felonies or breaches of the peace that are being committed in front of them.

A private citizen must know for a fact that a felony has been committed and have reaonsable grounds for the person he thinks did it.

Neither the police nor private citizens have a privilege to arrest someone for misdemeanor crimes.

Any force used in any arrest must be reasonable.
Describe the Authority of Law privilege for public officers with regards to arrests made without a warrant.
Both public officers and private citizens may arrest for felonies and breaches of the peace that are committed in their presence.

A public officer may arrest for reasonable evidence of a felony being committed and a person he knows for a fact has committed the crime.

Neither a public officer nor a private citizen can arrest a person for misdemeanor crimes.

No unreasonable force may be used while executing an arrest.
What factors should be considered when deciding if a parent has a privilege to discipline their child?
Age, sex, and condition of the child.

Nature of the offense and apparent motive.

Influence of the child's conduct on other children.

Whether force or confinement is reasonably necessary and appropriate to compel obedience.

Whether the force used is disproportionate to the offense, unnecessarily degrading, or likely to cause serious or permanent harm.