Reading...
Play button
Play button
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;
39 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Garratt v. Dailey
|
Young boy pulls chair out from behind old woman
|
Rule: Children can be liable for intentional torts if they can FORMULATE INTENT (can KNOW WITH SUBSTANTIAL CERTAINTY)
|
|
|
Spivey v. Battaglia
|
Man gives "friendly unsolicited hug" to coworker who he knows doesn't like to be touched. result: partial facial paralysis.
|
For A&B, D must REASONABLY BELIEVE injury would result. Therefore, NEGLIGENCE.
|
|
|
McGuire v. Almy
|
Mentally ill woman strikes live-in nurse, acted with intent (had threatened to injure P)
|
Mentally Ill can be liable for their torts IF they can formulate intent.
|
|
|
Ranson v. Kitner
|
D thought P's dog was wolf, shot it.
|
Mistake as to identity does not negate intent.
|
|
|
Smith v. Talmage
|
D meant to hit first boy, hit P. (boys were playing on D's shed)
|
Transferred intent--Intent to his first boy can be lifted, placed on boy who was hit.
|
|
|
Five torts within trespass writ:
|
Assault,
Battery, Trespass to Land, Trespass to Chattels, False Imprisonment |
|
|
|
Battery--Elements
|
1. Intent to cause harmful contact
2. Contact caused 3. Contact was harmful NEXT SLIDE: Liability? |
D is liable for FULL SCOPE of HARM, whether or not consequences were foreseeable, so long as elements are satisfied.
|
|
|
Liability:
Battery v. Negligence. Two cases |
Spivey v. Battaglia: Negligence, therefore D only liable for foreseeable harm.
Kid who kicks other kid, resulting in crazy nerve dam.: liable for full harm. |
|
|
|
Wallace v. Rosen
|
D touches mom at top of stair to get her to move for school fire drill, mom falls down stairs.
|
Rule: P must withstand "ordinary contact expected in society."
|
|
|
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc.
|
D knocks P's plate from his hand, says racial slur.
|
Plate is EXTENSION of P's PERSONALITY (EXTENDED PERSONALITY)
|
|
|
Battery--Recovery
(3 kinds) |
Prima Facie Claim (Nominal damages)
Emotional Distress (Actual damages) Awful Cases (Exemplary damages) |
|
|
|
Assault
Definition |
MANIFEST INTENT to commit HARMFUL CONTACT (battery) which causes IMMEDIATE apprehension
(Next: ELEMENTS) |
1. Intent
2. Attempted contact 3. Well-founded apprehension of contact 4. Apparent ability to carry out threat 5. IMMINENT |
|
|
Western Telegraph Co. v. Hill
|
Employee told P he would "fix her clock" while reaching over counter toward her.
|
Illustrates Assault elements
|
|
|
False Imprisonment
Elements |
1. Restraint of individual
2. Unlawfulness of restraint Next: Methods of false imprisonment: (3.5) |
Acts
Words Omissions Forcing P to abandon very valuable belonging (sometimes) |
|
|
When it's NOT False Imprisonment
|
One can only be KEPT IN (NOT kept out) in false imprisonment
If a SAFE ALT. EXIT exists, it's NOT False Imprisonment. |
|
|
|
Big Town Nursing Home v. Newman
|
P voluntarily admitted to nursing home, forced to stay, tries to escape, forced to come back. Home deposits his SS checks. (Example of WHAT?)
|
FALSE IMPRISONMENT--Example of DIRECT PHYSICAL RESTRAINT.
P REQUIRED to test physical boundaries. |
|
|
Hardy's v. LaBelle's Dist. Co.
|
Employee P accused of stealing watch, D asks her to come next day, stay for qs. She does, takes lie detector test. (Example of WHAT?) (and: problem with claim?)
|
FALSE IMPRISONMENT--Example of RESTRAINT BY WORDS.
NO LIABILITY--P WANTED to clear her name--not acting out of fear. |
|
|
Enright v. Groves
|
D, an officer, found P in nearby parked car after spotting her dog off a leash. Demands license, P only gives address, D arrests her, claims it's for leash law. (Ex. of WHAT?); (Policy??)
|
FALSE IMPRISONMENT--Submitting to legal auth./false arrest.
Policy: ALWAYS submit to false arrest to avoid confrontation with officer. |
|
|
Whittaker v. Sandford
|
P wants out of cult, agrees to travel on D (cult leader)'s boat on condition she can leave in US. They arrive, he won't let her leave with kids. (Ex. of WHAT?) (Typical WHEN?)
|
FALSE IMPRISONMENT--Limiting of P's independence/creation of dependence on D.
Typical with cults, drug treatment, etc. |
|
|
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress:
Elements |
1. Intentional or Reckless
2. Extreme or Outrageous 3. Causation 4. Severe |
|
|
|
IIED:
Extreme or Outrageous: Markers |
Abuse of Power
Taking Adv. of Emotionally Vulnerable Repeated acts (stalking-type behavior) Serious threat of violence, not imminent |
|
|
|
State Rubbish Collector's Ass'n v. Siliznoff
|
P threatened to force D to sign note agreeing to pay P for picking up garbage in P's territory, D signs under extreme duress, suffers physical symptoms
|
Case existed before IIED, but CLEAR example of IIED
|
|
|
Taylor v. Vallelunga
|
Daughter watched Ds beat father, but they didn't know she was there... NO LIABILITY because they couldn't have INTENDED to cause her emotional distress.
|
Rule: D must INTEND BEHAVIOR, not necessarily RESULT.
|
|
|
Slocum v. Food Fair Stores of Fla.
|
Employee told shopper she stinks, refused to give pricing info. P suffered heart attack. NO LIABILITY.
|
Rule: D's behavior NOT SEVERE ENOUGH to cause emotional distress in ORDINARY PERSON.
|
|
|
Harris v. Jones
|
P suing supervisor, who repeatedly teased P about his stutter, causing it to worsen. NO LIABILITY.
|
Rule: P didn't prove that IIED was SEVERE enough, didn't prove that taunting caused worsening of speech impediment. (NOTE: Most courts won't require this level of expert testimony to establish severity)
|
|
|
TRESPASS TO LAND
ELEMENTS |
1. PHYSICAL INVASION of P's property
2. INTENT to enter that particular property 3. Invasion caused by D's VOLITIONAL ACT. (What's not necessary for prima facie claim??) |
Damage!!
Notice of Boundaries!! Fence!! INTENT to TRESPASS (Mistake counts!!) |
|
|
Herrin v. Sutherland
|
D intentionally shot waterfowl above P's land. LIABILITY
(Two rules) |
Rule: Counts if D's buckshot, and not D, enters land, so long as invasion is physical.
Rule: P owns land above and below ground (to a point). |
|
|
Rogers v. Board of Road Com'rs for Kent Co.
|
D left snow fence post embedded in P's yard, P's husband was mowing, hit post, which his and killed him. LIABILITY
|
CONTINUING TRESPASS--D had REASONABLE TIME after permission ended to remove.
Damages don't have to be FORESEEABLE to be RECOVERABLE. |
|
|
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS
ELEMENTS |
1. Intent
2. Intermeddling with Chattels 3. Physical Damage/Impairing Value of Chattles OR Depriving Owner of Use OR Bodily Harm to Possessor/to Someone/thing P has Legally Protected Interest In NEXT: RECOVERY |
P can recover damages for INCONVENIENCE (rental fee for new chattel etc)
P may also be able to recover for EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (tho D's good faith arg may kill this recovery) If MALICIOUS, P can recover PUNITIVE DAMAGES |
|
|
Glidden v. Szybiak
|
4-year-old girl pulls dog's ears, dog bites her. D counterclaiming against girl, claiming trespass to chattel. NO LIABILITY
|
Trespass to Chattel requires PHYSICAL DAMAGE--dog not injured by earpull.
|
|
|
CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc.
|
D spamming P's email server clients, overloading system, causing P to lose clients. LIABILITY
|
Trespass to Chattel--D causing harm to thing P has legally protected interest in:
Taking up space on server, harming P's biz rep. |
|
|
CONVERSION
ELEMENTS |
1. INTENTional
2. EXERCISE or DOMINION or CONTROL 3. SO SERIOUSLY INTERFERES with right of P to control property that D IS REQ'D TO PAY FULL VALUE OF PROPERTY. NEXT: Recovery |
Damages are so severe that D must "buy" item at FULL MARKET VALUE.
Also may have to compensate for EMOTIONAL DISTRESS. Think pets. (D can make successful good faith arg.) D may have to pay PUNITIVE DAMAGES if malicious D KEEP CHATTEL. |
|
|
Pearson v. Dodd
|
Senator Dodd sues two employees who stole files at night, photocopied, returned in am. NO LIABILITY (despite principle).
|
Conversion can apply to COMMERCIALLY VALUABLE IDEAS (though didn't apply here--photocopied materials weren't commercially valuable)
|
|
|
CONSENT
OBJECTIVE TEST |
Would a RPP have interpreted P to have been consenting?
Next: LIMITATIONS |
P may consent to CERTAIN acts/behaviors, but NOT OTHERS.
|
|
|
Hacbart v. Cincinatti Bengals, Inc.
|
Football player intentionally hit in back of head and neck with forearm--LIABILITY
|
Rule: P consented to rules, but intentional hit to this place with forearm is NOT part of the rules P consented to.
|
|
|
O'Brien v. Cunard S.S. Co.
|
P stood on line with 200 others awaiting smallpox vaccination, raised arm to receive, now claiming she wasn't consenting. NO LIABILITY.
|
Although P didn't VOCALIZE her consent, her BEHAVIOR INDICATED it.
|
|
|
Consent in Medical Situations:
When is it NOT required? |
Imminent threat to life or limb, OR
When a complication arises during a procedure (IMPLIED CONSENT) Family members can also provide consent for a patient who can't. |
|
|
|
Mohr v. Williams
|
P consents to surgery on left ear, while unconscious MD discovers left ear is fine, but right ear needs surgery. LIABILITY
|
Rule: A patient who consents to one kind of operation HASN'T CONSENTED TO ANY OTHER PROCEDURE or OPERATING FIELD.
(note: MD acted in good faith, which limits damages but doesn't affect prima facie claim) |
|
|
May v. Roberts
|
P consented to presence of D and assistant (also D) on belief that D was medical assistant, but was actually layman. LIABILITY
|
Consent can't be got through FRAUD.
Legal standard for determining fraud: Would RPP under the circs have been deceived/mistaken? What about GOTCHA JOURNALISTS? If you consent to be filmed for any reason, you consent for another (think food critic) |
