Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • 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

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

51 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Intentional Torts
1. Intentional Torts: either intends to cause consequences of the act or if there’s substantial certainty that tort will result.
a. consent is a defense. If defendant exceeds consent he can he held liable.
i. Assault
b. Battery
c. Fi
d. Trespass to chattels
e. Conversion
f. Iied
g. Trespass to land
Defense to Intentional Torts
consent is a defense. If defendant exceeds consent he can he held liable
IIED & 3rd party recovery
must be a close family member and must be present and defendant must be aware or should be aware of the family member’s presence.
ED w/o physical injury or bodily harm
no damages
mistake of ownership
no defense to conversion
trespass to chattels
a SLIGHT interference to chattels. If defendant commits a trespass to chattels, then he’s liable for the diminished value of the chattel.
where the defendant exercises dominion or control over the chattel of another and it’s a substantial or significant interference with plaintiff’s ownership rights. At CL, a forced sale and defendant is liable for the full value of the chattel.
Mistaken trespass?
Mistake is no defense for intentional trespass
liability for intentional entry onto property of another
nominal damage even if no harm
Negligent or reckless entries
liable only if damage
Accidental entries
no liability if non-negligent and unintentional
Non-negligent accidental entry and unintentional
13. Non-negligent accidental entry and unintentional. No liability! ACCIDENTAL UNINTENTIONAL.
False Imprisonment:
D must act intending to confine the plaintiff w/in certain fixed boundaries
An actual confinement must occur.
Plaintiff must be aware of the confinement or injured by it.
Shopkeeper: who reasonably believes that a theft has occurred is priv to make a detention in a reasonable manner for a reas. Period of time to determine if theft has occurred. This is VERY limited. Shopkeeper must do on scene, what is nec. To det if theft has occurred. If unreas. Length (30 min +) then priv is lost and shopkeeper can be held liable for false imprisonment.
duty to control the conduct of a 3rd person
No duty to control the conduct of a 3rd person unless a special relationship exists between the parties. Prosser says, a special relationship exists here
Common carrier & its passengers
Innkeeper and its guests
Landlord and tenants
Jailors and prisoners
Schools and pupils* When the teacher noticed that T had gun, teacher owes a duty to take action in order to disarm student. By failing to take action, teacher has breached duty of care owed and school can be held liable for the student’s criminal acts that follow. Look for proximity as well.
duty owed to licensees
Licensees: A guest. Someone who has permission to enter on to your property. A possessor or owner of land owes a duty to WARN the licensee of KNOWN DANGEROUS CONDITIONS that exist.
Invitees: customer in a store. 2-fold duty owed. There are customers and there are buildings open to members of the public – like airports, hotels, museums, churches, you’re still an invitee and duty of care is to:
Inspect the premises and
Make safe for the protection of the invitees who enter
Automobile passengers
Gratuitous passengers – a licensee. A duty to warn him or her of known dangerous conditions.
Paying passengers – chip in for gas or pay tolls – an invitee
Hotel guest
Hotel guest is an invitee. Duty to inspect the premises and make safe for his or her protection.
Attractive nuisance doctrine
19. Attractive nuisance doctrine: the trespassing children’s doctrine
There must be an artificial dangerous condition on the property
The owner of the land must know or should know of the existence of the dangerous condition
A trespassing child must enter the property
*The child, b/c of youth, age, or immaturity fails to appreciate the danger or realize the risk.
The utility of maintaining the dangerous condition is slight compared to the risk. Subjective test: did child SUBJECTIVELY appreciate the danger or not? Obejctive for general negligence. Subjective for attractive nuisance.
Neg per se or violation of statute
Must be member of the class pf persons intended to be protected by the statute and
The harm suffered must be of a type the statute was designed to protect against.
* Blue law prohib. Sunday morning alcohol sales isn’t designed to prevent accidents. This is designed to aid in the observance of the Sabbath.
Res ipsa
Res ipsa: inference of negligence.
The accident does not normally occur absent negligence on the part of the defendant.
The instrumentality causing the accident was within the defendant’s exclusive control.
*Defendant parked the car on the hill, 2 is met, and inference that he is negligent because the car rolled down the hill.
Respondeat Superior
Respondeat Superior: employer is vicariously liable for negligence of employee that occurs w/in the scope of the employment relationship.
Employer vicariously liable. Indem shifts loss form one person required to pay to another person who should be liable instead. Can seek full amount from the other.
independent contractor
A person who hires an independent contractor is not vicariously liable for the negligence of the independent contractor.
2 exceptions
*Unless contractor engaged in a nondelegable duty, then employer IS vic liable
Usually on MBE, if it’s a non-del duty, situation where someone hires a person to perform work in a public area or in a public place. You own 10-story office building in Chicago. You hire painter. Since work is being performed in a public area and there’s a risk to pedestrians b/c of i.e. scaffold, then the duties are non delegable and the employer is vicariously liable for the negligence of the ind. Cont. But if you hire painter to pain at your personal home, and the painter injures someone, then NO vicarious liability.
Or if contractor engaged in ultrahazardous activity.
Joint tort feasors
Joint tort feasors: where you have 2+ tort feasors whose combined negligent acts cause an indivisible injury (incapable of apportionment) then each tort feasor is jointly severally liable for damages suffered by plaintiff.
Intervening Causes
Intervening Causes: X is negligent and that causes Y to be injured. Y is taken to hospital. ER doc acts negligently. Is that intervening act foreseeable or unforeseeable? If it’s foreseeable, then X will be liable for the new or aggravated injuries suffered by the plaintiff. An unforeseeable intervening force is a superceding force and BREAKS chain of causation and relieves X of any further tort liability.
Break chain
Acts of god
Criminal acts of 3rd persons
Intentional tortuous acts of 3rd persons
abnormally dangerous activity
Restatement of Torts 522: one who carries on an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to strict liability for the resulting harm even though it is caused by a force of nature.
Foreseeable Intervening cause
Subsequent medical malpractice.
Negligence of rescuers
Subsequent disease
Subsequent accidents
Strict Liability
3 types
Abnormally dangerous activities
Strict products liability
Wild animals
Fireworks- so commonplace that we apply a neg standard rather than strict liability. BUT if someone is storing fireworks in a warehouse and there’s an explosion then STRICT LIABILITY because storing explosives is ultrahazardous activity.
Radiation treatment
Radiation treatment is deemed to be ultrahazardous. Doctor is held strictly liable for the injuries to the plaintiff.
Strict products liability
Strict products liability: one who sells a product in a defective condition unreas dangerous to user or consumer is held strictly liable. They must be engaged in business of sale, manuf, distributor, retailer… everyone who is engaged in the business of sale if the product leaves the seller’s hands in a defective condition. CN is never a defense. The only defense in SL is AOR.
products dangerous when consumed in an excessive quantity
Seller is not required to warn with respect to products which are only dangerous when consumed in excessive quantity or over a long period of time when the danger is generally known and recognized.
thief and defective product
A thief is not deemed a foreseeable user.
who may recover for SL?
Any foreseeable or ordinary user of a defectively dangerous product may recover for strict liability. A thief is not deemed a foreseeable user.
SL and AOR
37. SL: AOR is a subjective test. The plaintiff must be subjectively aware of the risk and knowingly expose himself or herself to the danger.
Wild animals
38. Wild animals: owner or possessor of a wild animal, you are SL for harm or injury the animal causes. You can never domesticate a wild animal.
negligent misrepresentation
Defendant made a false statement to plaintiff
Scienter – defendant must know or should know the falsity of his or her statement
D must intend to induce P to act in reliance on the false statement
Justifiable reliance by the plaintiff
Damages/pecuniary loss suffered by the plaintiff
40. Nondisclosure – failure to disclose info. Generally, non-d is not actionable for fraud or deceit unless there is a fiduciary relationship between the parties.
Fiduciary relationships
Maj & min shareholder
Executor & beneficiaries
Bank and its depositors
Close family members, h & w, bro & sis
nuisance: disturbance… creates a substantial and unreasonable interference with one’s use and enjoyment of the property. In determining a nuisance, Court may take into account fears and feelings common to members in the community or locality. In this regard, fear or dread of contagen may make it a nuisance even though there is no support in scientific fact or data.
The disturbance must be annoying, inconvenient, or offensive to a normal or average person in the locality.
Coming to the nuisance
never an absolute defense – it is simply one factor that a Court will consider in balancing the equities.
Sound waves
are not tangible.
remedies for nuisance
Money damages
Injunctive relief
Abatement by self-help
Restatement 951: in an action for injunction, the Court may in addition to granting the injunction, also award a judgment for money damages.
Defamation: 2 types
Libel – written defamation
Slander – spoken defamation
P must plead and prove special damages.
But in slander per se, damage to P’s reputation is presumed and no need to plead and prove special damages.
Loathsome disease
Unchastity to a woman
Improper conduct in one’s trade, business, or profession
Where the defendant falsely accused the plaintiff of committing a crime
Publication: defamatory statement must be communicated to someone other than the person defamed. It must be understood by the 3rd person. Words spoken in other language are not actionable unless they are heard by someone who understands the language.
Defenses for defamation
Truth – an absolute defense
Absolute Priv. defense
Judicial Proceedings
Leg. Proceedings
Exec. Proceedings
Qualified Priv. defense*
QP to make def. statements in the public interest and in the interest of others. i.e. job recommendations – as long as former employer reasonably believes the info. To be true, QP to act in the interest of others. D is a better answer than C.
invasion of right to privacy
invasion of right to privacy. 4 distinct causes of action
False light cases
Public disclosure of private facts about plaintiff
Intrusion on one’s seclusion or solitude
Public disclosure
facts disclosed must be private facts
Embarrassment bars recovery on a negligence theory… in negligence actions, (neid, neg. misrep) we don’t allow recovery for mental suffering or distress unless accompanied by physical injury or bodily harm.
defamation vs. invasion of privacy
Defamatory statement must lower his good name in esteem of the community. Book placed him in false light.