Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Louisiana Bar Exam July 2023- Created By Maryclaire Farrington > 10. Torts > Flashcards

10. Torts Flashcards

1
Q

Cause-In-Fact Tests

A

Two Tests:
1. BUT FOR
2. SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Scope of Risk: Foreseeability

A
  1. is this a reasonably foreseeable person?
  2. is this a reasonably foreseeable risk?

only the general type of harm needs to be foreseeable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Scope of Risk: Ease of Association

A

how easily can this injury be associated with the negligent act?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Owner Liability for Actions of Lessees/ Tenants

A

owner is liable in tort or the actions of its tenant where the owner:

  1. knows or reasonably should have known that the activity would cause damage
  2. the damage could have been prevented by reasonable care, and
  3. the landowner failed to exercise such reasonable care
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Defamation: Types

A
  • Defamation per se
  • Susceptible of defamatory meaning
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Intent

A

purpose or knowledge to a substantial certainty

subjective standard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Transferred Intent

A
  • transfer between people
  • transfer between torts

cannot transfer to or from IIED

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Battery

A
  1. intent to contact
  2. actual contact
  3. contact is offensive or harmful
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Contact

A

a touching of P’s person or contact with something closely connected to the person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Harm or Offense

A

to a person of reasonable sensibilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Assault

A
  1. intent to create a reasonable apprehension of an imminent battery
  2. reasonable apprehension of imminent battery
  3. apparent means to complete the battery
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

reasonable apprehension of an imminent battery is not the same as _______

A

fear

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

False Imprisonment

A
  1. intent to confine
  2. actual confinement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Confinement

A

actual, complete confinement

  • reasonable means of escape destroys confinement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

IIED

A
  1. specific intent
  2. extreme and outrageous behavior
  3. causation of severe emotional distress
  4. severe emotional distress
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Prescription and IIED

A

does not begin until completion of last act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Trespass to Land

A
  1. intent to enter
  2. physical entrance onto property of another (can be entrance by object)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Knowledge in Trespass

A

irrelevant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Land

A

includes the area above and below the surface

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Trespass to Chattel and Conversion

A
  1. intent to interfere with the dominion or with the use and enjoyment of the chattel of another
  2. substantial dominion or interference with the use and enjoyment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Choosing between trespass to chattel and conversion is only a matter of _________.

A

remedy

  • trespass = get damages / fair rental value
  • conversion = force sale and you get proceeds
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Intentional Interference with Contractual Relationship

A
  1. K btw P and 3P
  2. D’s knowledge of the K
  3. D’s intentional interference with the K
  4. causation of damages
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Defamation

A

(false statement/ damage to one’s reputation)

  1. false and defamatory statement concerning another
  2. unprivileged publication to a 3P
  3. fault (negligence or greater) on behalf of the publisher
  4. causation of damages – injury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Defamation attaches to _______ not __________.

A

Defamation attaches to STATEMENTS not OPINIONS.

  • statements can be proven/ opinions cannot
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Publication in Defamation

A

requires statement be communicated to a 3P

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Defense to Defamation

A

truth is an absolute defense

(if true, but nonetheless harmful, sue for Invasion of Privacy)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Constitutional Issues to Raise in Defamation

A
  • statement relates to a PUBLIC OFFICIAL or a matter of PUBLIC CONCERN = actual malice is required
  • Public Officials/Public Figures must prove ACTUAL MALICE
  • Private Plaintiff/Public Matter requires proof of INJURY AND NEGLIGENCE BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Actual Malice

A

knowledge that the statement is false or reckless disregard regarding its truth or falsity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Absolute Privilege

A
  • Judges,
  • Witnesses,
  • Attorneys,
  • Legislators

(germaine to proceedings)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Qualified Privilege

A
  • non-court statements
  • peer review
  • reporting crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Invasion of Privacy: 4 Types

A
  • intrusion upon seclusion
  • appropriation of name or likeness
  • publicity given to private life or facts
  • false light
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Intrusion of Seclusion

A
  1. intentional intrusion (physical or otherwise)
  2. upon seclusion
  3. that is highly offensive to a reasonable person
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Appropriation of Name or Likeness (Publicity)

A
  1. appropriation by D
  2. to his benefit
  3. of P’s name/ likeness
  4. without consent
  5. actual damages
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Public Disclosure of Private Facts

A
  1. publication to public
  2. about private facts
  3. that is highly offensive AND not of reasonable importance to the public (can be true)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

False Light

A

affiliated with a group or cause you are not

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Invasion of Privacy differs from defamation because truth is not a ________________ to ________________.

A

Invasion of Privacy differs from defamation because truth is not a DEFENSE to INVASION OF PRIVACY.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Many of the defenses apply to both Invasion of Privacy and Defamation.

In particular, because speech is involved, ________________ ________________ may be required by the U.S. Constitution.

A

Many of the defenses apply to both Invasion of Privacy and Defamation. In particular, because speech is involved, ACTUAL MALICE may be required by the U.S. Constitution.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Malicious Prosecution

A
  1. original criminal or civil proceeding
  2. with a P in the malicious prosecution as D in the original proceeding
  3. termination of the original proceeding in favor of the malicious prosecution P
  4. absence of probable cause for the original proceeding
  5. damages
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Abuse of Process

A
  1. ulterior purpose
  2. willful act in the use of process that is improper
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Malice is shown . . .

A

through ulterior purpose

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Distinguishing Abuse of Process from Malicious Prosecution - Malicious Prosecution involves wrongfully initiating a legal ________________, while Abuse of Process involves wrongfully using ________________.

A

Distinguishing Abuse of Process from Malicious Prosecution - Malicious Prosecution involves wrongfully initiating a legal PROCEEDING, while Abuse of Process involves wrongfully using PROCEDURE.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Defenses to Intentional Torts

A
  • self defense
  • consent
  • arrest and detention
  • necessity
  • defense of others
  • defense of property and recapture of chattels
  • deadly force / statutory immunity

SCAND-DD

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Consent: validity and capacity

A
  • NOT valid if obtained through fraud, duress or misrepresentation
  • valid when given by mistake
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Implied Consent

A

consent may be implied by facts and circumstances

can be withdrawn at any reasonable time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Self Defense: Reasonable Grounds

A

An actor may defend herself when she has reasonable grounds to believe that it is necessary.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

Self Defense: Reasonable Force

A

An actor may only use reasonable force to defend himself.

excessive force exceeds the scope of the privilege.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

Self Defense: Deadly Force

A

can only use deadly force when you are threatened with the same

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

Defense of Others: Relationship to Self Defense

A

One may defend others to the same extent that the third person may defend herself.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Defense of Others: Risk of Mistake

A

The risk of mistake is borne by the defender.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

Arrest and Detention

A
  • officers who are acting in accordance with the law
  • store owners can detain up to 60 mins where they have reasonable belief of a theft
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

Defense of Property and Recapture of Chattels

A
  • only belongs to possessor of the property
  • reasonable force to protect
  • when in hot pursuit, can use reasonable force to recapture
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

Deadly Force and the Statutory Immunity

A

seemingly creates statutory immunity to defend property using deadly force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

Necessity

A

Necessity allows the defendant to TRESPASS where the action will result in a greater good, usually saving lives.

ONLY applies to intentional torts against property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

But-For Test

A

but for the alleged negligent conduct, would injury have occurred?

CAN HAVE MORE THAN 1 BUT FOR CAUSES

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

Substantial Factor Test

A

was D’s negligence a substantial factor in causing P’s injury?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

Multiple Causes of Negligence?

A

use substantial factor test

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

Evidentiary Standard for Negligence

A

= more probable than not

relax standard for multiple sufficient causes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

Negligence: Requirements

A

LA applies the duty-risk analysis approach to negligence, which requires 5 elements:

(1) cause in fact
(2) duty
(3) scope of the risk
(4) breach
(5) injury

CDSBI (Christy Drives So Bad I’m suing for negligence)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

Traditional Duty (methods of analysis)

A
  1. Reasonable Person
  2. Negligence Per Se
  3. Custom
  4. Res Ipsa

(go in that order IF they apply)

RNCR

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

Reasonable Person Standard

A

actor is expected to behave as a reasonable, ordinary, prudent person under like circumstances

  • not average
  • physical disabilities considered
  • mental disabilities treated as a sane person
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

Reasonable Child Standard

A

expected to behave like a child of like age and development

also talk about parental responsibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

Negligence Per Se: When does it apply?

A
  • look for statues/ ordinances/ regulations (these are NOT tort statutes)
  • legislature has told us how a reasonable ordinary prudent person behaves
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

Negligence Per Se: Application of Statute

A
  • ask the class of person and the class of risk to determine relevance
  • statute will become mere EVIDENCE – NO PRESUMPTIVE EFFECT
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

Custom (general points)

A
  • has to be established by some evidence
  • sword/ shield
  • safety standards
  • professional negligence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

Evidence for Custom

A
  • safety manual
  • practice
  • safety standards
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

Role of Custom for Professional Negligence

A

customary standard of care = EXCLUSIVE method of determining reasonableness of conduct in professional negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

Res Ipsa Loquitor

A

“the thing speaks for itself”

  1. event is of the kind that ordinarily does not occur absent negligence
  2. other responsible causes (including conduct of Ps and 3P) are sufficiently eliminated by the evidence
  3. indicted negligence is within the scope of the D’s duty to P

very strict – judge applies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

Res Ipsa _______, but does not _______ an inference of negligence.

A

Res Ipsa allows, but does not mandate an inference of negligence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

Res Ipsa _________ apply in the presence of direct evidence.

A

Res Ipsa does not apply in the presence of direct evidence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

Scope of the Risk/Scope of the Duty

A

“Was this plaintiff’s injury within the scope of this defendant’s duty?”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

Things to Analyze in Scope of Risk / Scope of Duty

A
  1. foreseeable risk / foreseeable P
  2. ease of association
  3. intervening and superseding causes
  4. PITRE policy factors
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

Scope of Risk: Intervening Cause

A

an event that occurs between defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s injury

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

Scope of Risk: Superseding Cause

A

intervening cause that relieves the defendant of liability

factors:

  • foreseeability (MORE fore = LESS super)
  • culpability/ fault (MORE faulty = MORE super)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

Scope of Risk: Pitre Policy Factors

A

(1) need for compensation of losses
(2) historical development of precedents
(3) moral aspects of D’s conduct
(4) efficient administration of law
(5) deterrence of future conduct
(6) capacity to bear/distribute losses

“New Hoes Means Everyone Does Coke”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

Pitre Policy Factors Purpose

A

used to determine whether
a specific injury to a specific plaintiff
should be included in the scope of risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

Breach of Duty

A

occurs when the defendant’s conduct falls below the standard of reasonable care

= CREATES AN UNREASONABLE RISK OF HARM

objective standard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q

Hand Formula

A

B < LP = defendant has breached the standard of care, and has thus created an unreasonable risk of harm

B: burden of the precaution
L: loss
P: probability of the loss

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

How to Determine Breach

A

use a utility-risk analysis, otherwise known as the Hand formula

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

Injury

A

plaintiff must have suffered a compensable injury to their person or property

includes lost chance of survival in med mal cases

includes emotional distress (alongside physical injury) and fear of disease

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

Controlling 3P Possible Players

A
  1. caretakers
  2. parents
  3. 3P criminal activity

duty = reasonable person standard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

Parents/ Child in Fact Pattern . . .

A
  1. is the child negligent?
  2. parental negligent supervision?
  3. parental responsibility for acts of children under 2318
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q

3P Criminal Activity

A

merchants and others may have duty to guard against reasonably FORESEEABLE criminal activity

  • duty = reasonable person standard
  • look for previous criminal activity at or near D’s location (prior similar incidents)
83
Q

Allocation of Fault in 3P Criminal Activity

A

Although intervening criminal behavior may be foreseeable and within the scope of the duty, the intervening criminal and negligent shopkeeper must be allocated a percentage share of fault.

84
Q

Slip and Fall

A

mention it is a statute!

  1. condition presented an unreasonable risk of harm
  2. harm was reasonably foreseeable
  3. merchant either creates or had actual or constructive knowledge of the CONDITION
  4. merchant failed to exercise reasonable care

+ bring action against EE who caused damages

85
Q

Preface to Slip and Fall

A

“in addition to negligence, P must establish the PFC for a slip and fall. However, it is really just a negligence action under the statute and the requirements are:”

86
Q

Slip and Fall: Actual or Constructive Notice

A

The length of time that the hazard existed is the key inquiry.

  • knew or should have known through the exercise of reasonable care
  • longer = more unreasonable = more likely knew
87
Q

NIED Allows . . .

A

allows the person to be able to SUE, but must still be able to establish fault on the part of the person they’re suing

88
Q

NIED: Direct Victims

A
  • corpses (handling of the body)
89
Q

NIED: Fear of Disease

A

must have highly significant legitimate risk

90
Q

Medical Malpractice: Standard of Care

A
  • judged exclusively by custom
  • expert testimony required

“medical professionals must exhibit that standard of care of a duly licensed processional in the same or similar community”

91
Q

Same or Similar Community?

A
  • same = QHCP
  • similar = non-QHCP
92
Q

Malpractice Defined: to determine whether an act is malpractice, the court applies:

A

the Coleman factors

93
Q

Coleman Factors

A
  1. Was the wrong “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill
  2. Does the wrong require expert medical evidence to determine breach (no expert, probs just negligence)
  3. Did the wrong involve an assessment of the patient’s condition
  4. Was there a patient-physician relationship
  5. Would the injury have occurred if the patient had not sought treatment
  6. Is the alleged tort an intentional tort?
94
Q

Cap in MedMal Cases

A

Damages are capped at $500k, with each individual provider responsible for the first $100k.

The remainder is paid by the Patient Compensation Fund.

PCF is funded by insurance premiums from QHCPs.

95
Q

Panel in MedMal Cases

A

Each malpractice case must be processed through a Medical Review Panel, consisting of three medical professionals and a non-voting attorney chair.

The panel will decide whether the defendant health care provider failed to act in accordance with the standard of care

96
Q

Informed Consent in MedMal (BACKGROUND)

A
  • unique to medmal
  • hybrid between battery and negligence
  • NOT failure to warn
97
Q

Informed Consent

A
  1. disclosure
  2. materiality
  3. uniform consent law
98
Q

Informed Consent: Disclosure

A

HCP has duty to disclose all material risks

99
Q

Informed Consent: Material Risk

A

those risks which a reasonable person would consider significant

+ causation element: if P had known of the risk, wouldn’t have done the procedure

100
Q

Informed Consent: Uniform Consent Law

A

rebuttable presumption of valid consent IF written consent in conformity with uniform consent law

101
Q

Prescription in MedMal

A
  • 1 year from date of incident or discovery
  • 3 year cap on discovery doctrine
102
Q

Attorney Malpractice

A
  • duty = licensed processional in same or similar community (customary standard of care)
  • BURDEN SHIFTING: once a plaintiff establishes a PFC that attorney’s negligence caused loss, the burden shifts to the attorney to prove the client would not have succeeded
  • 1 year prescription/ 3 year peremptive
103
Q

Providers of Alcohol Statute

A

statute confers immunity to the social host (removed if serving someone underage)

104
Q

Proximate Cause and Alcohol

A

the drinking, not the serving or selling, is the proximate cause of the injuries

105
Q

Alcohol Sellers

A

permitted seller not responsible for off-site injuries UNLESS:

  • the drinker is under the age of majority
    AND
  • there is negligence
106
Q

Social Hosts

A

social hosts not responsible for injuries UNLESS:

  • the drinker is under the age of majority
    AND
  • there is negligence
107
Q

Drinker of alcohol is almost always _________.

A

Drinker of alcohol is almost always negligent.

ALWAYS CONSIDER PUNITIVE DAMAGE AWARD

108
Q

Dunk Defendant

A

apply negligence per se if driving with BAC above the legal limit

109
Q

Strict Liability

A

Strict liability is the same as negligence, except that we assume that defendant KNEW of the dangerous condition.

For things and buildings Louisiana has eliminated strict liability in favor of a NEGLIGENCE standard.

110
Q

Two areas of strict liability in LA:

A
  1. Children
  2. Dog Owners
111
Q

Two areas USED to be strict liability, now use negligence standard:

A
  1. owner of thing
  2. owner of building
112
Q

Owner/ Custodian of a Thing

A
  1. D has knowledge (or constructive knowledge) of the ruin/ vice/ defect
  2. damage could have been prevented by exercise of reasonable care
  3. D failed to exercise reasonable care
113
Q

Owner/ Custodian of a Building

A
  1. D has knowledge (or constructive knowledge) of the ruin/ vice/ defect
  2. damage could have been prevented by exercise of reasonable care
  3. D failed to exercise reasonable care
114
Q

Owner/ Custodian of a Building: Landlord/ Tenant Agreements

A

landlord is strictly liable for personal injury to the tenant unless express shift of responsibility in K

115
Q

Strict Liability: Parental Responsibility for Children

A

parents are strictly liable for the acts of their children when:

  1. parent/ child relationship (residing together)
  2. child fault when measured by an adult standard
116
Q

Owners of Animals

A

negligence standard

117
Q

Owners of Dogs

A

strictly liable for damages when:

  1. owner could have prevented the harm
  2. no provocation of the dog
118
Q

Absolute Liability

A

unlike negligence and strict liability, imposes liability without fault

119
Q

Absolute Liability Circumstances

A
  • pile driving
  • blasting
120
Q

For uses of the land other than pile driving or blasting, an owner is only responsible upon a showing that:

A

negligence standard for all other actions involving land

  1. D has knowledge (or constructive knowledge) of the risk
  2. damage could have been prevented by the exercise of reasonable care
  3. D failed to exercise reasonable care
121
Q

Products Liability

A

The Louisiana Products Liability Act (LPLA) establishes exclusive remedies against manufacturers of products for personal injury actions.

  1. D must be a manufacturer of a product
  2. damage must be caused by a characteristic of the product that made it unreasonably dangerous
  3. product must be dangerous in 1 of 4 ways
  4. damage must result from reasonably anticipated use
122
Q

Unreasonably Dangerous in 1 of 4 Ways

A
  • construction or composition
  • design defect
  • failure to warn
  • breach of express warranty
123
Q

Manufacturer

A
  • assembler/ manufacturer etc.
  • persons holding themselves out as manufacturer
  • component part manufacturer
124
Q

Proximate Cause

A

Do not repeat the entire “scope of the risk” (which is the equivalent of proximate cause) discussion.

Rather, focus on actual cause and particular aspects of proximate cause/scope of the risk such as superseding causes.

125
Q

Unseasonably Dangerous in Construction or Composition

A
  1. defect must exist at time the product leaves the control of the manufacturer
  2. material deviation from identical products
  3. strict liability theory

exploding coke bottle

126
Q

Unreasonably Dangerous Because of a Design Defect

A
  1. defect must exist at time the product leaves the control of the manufacturer
  2. P has burden of proving there was an alternative design that would have prevented P’s damage
  3. balancing test (lost utility with expected safety gain)
  4. state of the art DEFENSE
127
Q

State of the Art Defense

A
  • manufacturer’s BOP
  • couldn’t have reasonably known of alternative design
128
Q

Unreasonably Dangerous Due to Inadequate Warning

A

(or no warning at all!)

  1. defect must exist at time the product leaves the control of the manufacturer
  2. balancing test (likelihood and gravity of the danger against feasibility and effectiveness of a warning)
  3. defenses
  4. continuing duty
129
Q

Continuing Duty in Inadequate Warning Cases

A

when manufacturer learns of the risk and possible duty to warn

130
Q

Defenses for Inadequate Warning

A
  • obvious dangers
  • actual knowledge of the risk by user
  • manufacturer did not know
  • warning not passed on by seller
131
Q

Unreasonably Dangerous Due to Breach of Express Warranty

A
  1. must have made express warranty (express statement, not puffing)
  2. claimant induced to use product by the warranty
  3. warranty was untrue
  4. claimant sustained damages as a result
132
Q

Reasonably Anticipated Use

A

damage in products liability case must arise from reasonably anticipated use of product by P or another person

NOT limited to intended use

includes reasonably foreseeable misuse!

133
Q

Vicarious Liability

A

Vicarious liability requires three elements.

  1. employment relationship
  2. negligence must occur while the employee is acting within the course and scope of the employment relationship
  3. employee must have been at fault (do negligence analysis)
134
Q

Employee vs. Independent Contractor

TESTS

A

no vicarious liability for IK

  • control test
  • borrowed EE
  • dual employment

(EXCEPTION = ultrahazardous activities)

135
Q

Control Test

A

could the ER have exercised control over how the work was done

  • right of control
  • exercise of control
  • relinquish of control
  • whose work?
136
Q

Borrowed EE

A

did the FIRST employer relinquish control such that the employee was under the control of the SECOND employer?

e.g. temp agency and business contract together = borrowed worker

(apply same control test)

136
Q

Dual Employment

A

both lending and borrowed ERs can both be ERs

e.g.: wages by temp and control by other = both ERs

137
Q

Course and Scope

A

Employer is vicariously responsible for actions of employee where the act is within the course and scope of the employment relationship.

  • frolic and detour
  • enterprise/ risk theory
138
Q

Frolic and Detour

A

deviation from the course and scope that results in no vicarious liability

is it significant enough?

139
Q

Enterprise/ Risk Theory

A

whether is it FAIR to attribute the risk to the business

  • reasonable expectation of ER
  • payment of wages
  • direct control/ actual control over work
  • benefit to ER
  • relationship to act and business
  • time/place/purpose of the act
  • ER instructions
140
Q

Always look for negligent hiring, training, supervision, etc… in addition to vicarious liability.

A
  • EE fault
  • ER fault through vicarious liability
  • ER fault through negligent hiring
141
Q

Vicarious Liability: Intentional Conduct

A

ER can be liable for EE’s INTENTIONAL TORTS if the conduct is

so closely connected in time, place, and cause that it constitutes a risk of harm attributable to the employer’s business

142
Q

Prescription for Torts

A

1 year from date of incident

143
Q

Contra Non Valentum

A

The prescriptive period may be extended beyond the one-year period in four instances:

  1. legal cause prevented filing of lawsuit
  2. D concealed facts that would allow P to discover the claim (active concealment)
  3. D has done something to keep P from filing
  4. discovery doctrine = theory not known/ reasonably knowable
144
Q

Limitations on Contra Non Valentum

A

discovery doctrine capped at 3 years for MedMal oNLY

145
Q

Comparative Fault Preface

A

The factfinder must allocate a percentage of fault to each responsible party, regardless of whether the party is present in the lawsuit, immune or insolvent.

Each party is then responsible only for its allotted share. To determine each party’s allotted share, factfinders apply the Watson factors.

146
Q

Watson Factors

A
  • Whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger;
  • How great was the risk created by the conduct;
  • The significance of what was sought by the conduct (utility);
  • The capacities of the actors, whether superior or inferior;
  • Extenuating circumstances which might require the actor to proceed in haste without proper thought; and
  • The relationship between the fault/negligent conduct and the harm to the plaintiff
147
Q

Solidary Liability

A

For torts, Louisiana has effectively eliminated solidary liability.

The major exception is that a vicariously responsible employer is liable in solido with its employee.

148
Q

Seatbelts - Liability

A

Failure to properly use seatbelts IS admissible into evidence to establish comparative fault.

(new law)

149
Q

Alcohol - Liability

A

A plaintiff who is operating a motorized vehicle, with a blood alcohol concentration of .08, and is found to be in excess of 25% at fault may not recover for any damages.

DOES NTO APPLY FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS IF VALID RX

150
Q

Immunities

A
  • worker’s comp
  • sovereign immunity
  • family immunity
  • recreational land immunity
  • rescuer immunity
151
Q

Workers’ Comp

A

EE trying to recover against ER or co-EE

The Workers’ Compensation Act provides an exclusive remedy for the employee against his/her employer or co-employee where the terms of the statute are met.

The compromise allows the injured employee to recover damages pursuant to the statute, but the employer and the co-employee will be immune from civil tort lawsuits, except for intentional acts.

152
Q

Workers’ Comp Compromise

A

WC allows defined recovery with reduced standards of proof for injured workers, but it also creates an IMMUNITY for the employer and co- employee.

153
Q

Workers’ Comp Requirements

A
  1. employment relationship
    • payroll ER
    • borrowing ER AND/OR
    • statutory ER
  2. nature of injury
    • arise out of employment AND
    • in course of employment
  3. defined compensable injury under the statute
154
Q

Workers’ Comp Exceptions

A
  • horseplay
  • personal disputes not concerning employment
  • intentional act
155
Q

See Employment Relationship?

Think 3 Things

A
  1. WC immunity
  2. vicarious liability
  3. negligent hiring/ training/ supervision

do not ever mention statutory employment in vicarious liability

156
Q

Statutory Employment

ONLY FOR WC!

A

must meet terms of the statute

  • K must recite that the principal is a statutory employer
  • EE’s work is an “integral part” of the enterprise
157
Q

Nature of the Injury: Workers’ Comp

A
  • arising out of = whether the injury grew out of a job-related risk
  • in the course of = time and location
158
Q

In ___________, “course and scope” is a term of art and should be discussed as a single theory.

In _________, the statute divides the inquiry into two separate questions.

A

In vicarious liability, “course and scope” is a term of art and should be discussed as a single theory.

In WC, the statute divides the inquiry into two separate questions.

159
Q

Sovereign Immunity

A

must be discussed when the defendant is a governmental entity

  • general immunity
  • constitutional waiver
  • jury trials generally prohibited unless gov waives
  • generally damages capped at $500k
  • applies to discretionary acts or policies
  • has been waived in the LA constitution
160
Q

Public Duty Doctrine

A

In order to prove public entity liability for a thing, the plaintiff must establish:

  1. custody/ ownership by government entity
  2. defect caused unreasonable risk of harm
  3. public entity had actual/ constructive knowledge of the defect
  4. public entity failed to take corrective action within a reasonable time
  5. causation of damages
161
Q

Family Immunities

A

Spouses may not sue each other and children may not sue parents. Parents may, however, sue children.

immunity exists only as long as the status exists and the prescriptive period begins to run when the status is terminated.

162
Q

Recreational Land Immunity

A

Applies to undeveloped land used for noncommercial recreational purposes.

163
Q

Rescuer Immunity

A

Amateur rescuers at an emergency scene are immune from negligence.

164
Q

Discretionary Act Immunity

A

a public entity is NOT liable for actions based on policy-making discretionary acts where the choice is within the public entity’s discretion by statute

165
Q

Types of Damages

A
  • nominal
  • compensatory
    • special
    • general
  • lost enjoyment of life
  • punitive damges
166
Q

Property Damage Election

A

A plaintiff who has suffered compensable property damage may elect to recover either decrease in value or lost of repair, UNLESS repair is out of proportion with the decrease in value.

There is an exception to the exception: A plaintiff may recover the higher value when a reason personal for the repair or some other reason to believe P will conduct repairs.

167
Q

Punitive Damages

A

only available under the following circumstances:

  1. driving while intoxicated
  2. sexual abuse of a minor
  3. child pornography
  4. Drug Dealer Liability Act
168
Q

Hedonic Damages

A

lost enjoyment of life

169
Q

Collateral Source

A

A plaintiff is allowed to recover for any expenses or damages actually paid by a 3d party, such as insurance,

plus 40% of the difference between the amount billed and the amount actually payed.

170
Q

Lost Consortium

A

Certain parties who suffer their own damages may recover for those damages.

available when the injured party lives, and are available to the same parties that would have had a wrongful death action if the victim were dead.

171
Q

Wrongful Death and Survival (differences)

A

someone has to be DEAD - discuss WD first

WD is an action brought by beneficiaries for their own damage.

Survival is an action brought by beneficiaries for the decedent’s injuries suffered.

172
Q

Beneficiaries in WD and Survival

(they are the same!)

A

Once you find a beneficiary in a category, all beneficiaries within that category can recover, and no one in a lower category can recover.

  1. children and spouse
  2. surviving parents
  3. surviving brothers and sisters
  4. surviving grandparents
  5. succession representative
173
Q

Prescription for WD and Survival

A

1 year from date of death

174
Q

Choice of Law

A
  • recognize that the problem is a choice of law problem
  • recognize that the La. Civil Code governs choice-of-law and that a Louisiana court will apply the Louisiana choice-of-law provisions
  • apply the “serious impairment” test and/or specific provisions

presume LA law

175
Q

Choice of Law: Serious Impairment Test

A

Apply the law of the state whose policies would be most seriously impaired if its law were not applied.

  • contacts of each state to parties/ events
  • interstate system and uniformity
  • district policies - deterrence/ compensation
176
Q

Choice of Law: Specific Provisions

A

apply after discussing serious impairment

  • conduct and safety (tortious act/ injury location)
  • loss distribution
  • products liability
  • punitive damages (if other state allows punitives)
177
Q

Defamation Per Se

A

words that by their very nature tend to injure one’s personal or professional reputation, OR that expressly/implicitly accuse someone of criminal conduct

malice and fault are presumed (unless protected by first amendment privilege)

178
Q

Susceptible of defamatory meaning

A

P must prove defamatory meaning and publication, falsity, fault, and injury

179
Q

Exemplary Damages

A

for wanton or reckless disregard for the rights and safety of others

180
Q

MedMal Preface

A

Medical malpractice is largely governed by statute. Under the statutes, we must distinguish between Qualified Healthcare Providers (QHCPs) and those that are not qualified. A hospital, and its employees, become QHCPs by furnishing evidence of $100,000 worth of private or self-insurance, and paying the appropriate fee to the state of Louisiana.

The QHCPs’ liability is then limited to $100,000, with the remainder paid by a state entity known as the Patient Compensation Fund or PCF. In addition, the overall liability is capped at $500,000, exclusive of future medicals.

Finally, any medical malpractice case against a QHCP must proceed through a Medical Review Panel (MRP), consisting of three profes- sionals and a non-voting attorney chair.

The MRP will issue an opinion concerning whether the defendant breached the standard of care of a licensed professional in the same or similar community. The MRP opinion does not resolve the case but becomes admissible as expert testimony once the action is filed in court.

181
Q

NIED

A
  1. The claimant must view the accident which caused injury to the other or come upon the scene soon thereafter [contemporaneous viewing ]
  2. The mental anguish must be reasonable
  3. The mental anguish must be serious and foreseeable
  4. The claimant must be within one of the statutorily listed relationships with the direct victim

The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that recovery under 2315.6 is limited to concurrent viewing of sudden, traumatic events.

182
Q

Survival Damages

A

those suffered by the DEAD victim AFTER tort, BEFORE he died

  • lost wages
  • pain and suffering
  • medical expenses
183
Q

D might try to argue that the action for property damage is not covered under the LPLA, but the only exception is an action for redhibition.

An action for property damage to its truck is a claim under the LPLA.

A
184
Q

Obligation of Neighbors

A
  1. D knew/ should have known of the risk
  2. that the injury could have been prevented through the exercise of reasonable care
  3. the D failed to exercise reasonable care

667 statute

creates an action by one neighbor against another neighbor for intentional conduct that interferes with the use and enjoyment of the property

185
Q

under a risk-duty analysis, the “moral, social and economic values involved” do not warrant extending a duty, and hence liability, to those who might suffer indirect economic losses from an act of negligence

A
186
Q

owner typically has a nondelegable duty to _____________

A

owner typically has a nondelegable duty to maintain property

duty to repair known defects in your car

187
Q

Negligence per se is a doctrine that utilizes non-tort statutes to help determine how reasonable people behave under certain circumstances. In this case, there is a Louisiana statute that imposes a fine for texting or reading a text while driving. Although the statute does not establish or eliminate any tort liability, it could be used by the factfinder to help determine whether Dan behaved unreasonably.

Courts determine the admissibility of the statute by asking whether the plaintiff is part of the class of persons that the statute was designed to protect and whether the risk is one of the risks that the statute was designed to prevent.

A
188
Q

Courts have dealt with intervening medical negligence on many occasions, and the general rule is that:

A

simple medical negligence does not supersede the original negligent conduct.

if the medical negligence is gross negligence, then it is more likely to be considered superseding

HOWEVER, the original negligent actor is responsible for any EXACERBATION of injuries

189
Q

Negligent Credentialing

A

NOT medical malpractice and the claim need not be submitted to a medical review panel and is not subject to the cap on damages

190
Q

Merchant

A

a party whose business it is to sell goods, foods, wares, or merchandise

191
Q

negligent driving of an ambulance is _________ considered medical malpractice

A

negligent driving of an ambulance is NOT LIKELY considered medical malpractice

192
Q

Malpractice Definition

A

any unintentional tort or any breach of contract based on health care or professional services rendered, or which should have been rendered, by a health care provider, to a patient

193
Q

Effects of a Recall in Products Liability Cases

A
  • standard for a recall is not necessarily the same as the risk-utility balancing test imposed in the statute
  • does establish the existence of an alternative design since there was a repair available at a reasonable cost
  • establishes that there was a relatively high expected loss, (otherwise they wouldn’t have done a recall)
  • is the warning sufficient to provide constructive notice?
  • satisfies continuing duty?
194
Q

Emergency Doctrine

A

argument that actions during emergency were reasonable and not negligent

195
Q

Wrongful Death Damages

A

damages suffered by BENEFICIARIES when person DEAD

  • grief
  • loss of love, affection, services, support and society
196
Q

Although actions against the State could be immune, the State of Louisiana has waived most tort immunity in the state constitution.

More precisely, the immunity is waived and a scheme for recovery in medical malpractice actions against the State is established by statute.

A
197
Q

IF NO WC IMMUNITY, CLAIM NEGLIGENCE!

A
198
Q

Although an intentional tort may be motivated by personal animus, the conduct would be considered within the course and scope of the EE’s job IF it was the position at the employment that put the EE in the position to engage in the tort.

A
199
Q

liability for _______________ extends to all consequences regardless of whether the consequences were intended or foreseeable

A

liability for intentional torts extends to all consequences regardless of whether the consequences were intended or foreseeable

200
Q

Although some courts have extended vicarious liability to encompass physicians who are not employed by hospitals, Louisiana has not adopted this standard.

A
201
Q

Louisiana law is clear that a collision is not required to find resulting injuries to be within the scope of the risk.

For example, a party that strikes his/her head on the steering wheel while trying to avoid an accident may recover for the injuries even in the absence of a collision.

A
202
Q

Concurrent Negligent Acts with Product Liability

A

negligent actor will be liable as well - even if defect was also a cause

rollerblader/ mower

203
Q

violation of an applicable statute, which may sometimes establish breach of duty, will be excused where compliance was _________

A

violation of an applicable statute, which may sometimes establish breach of duty, will be excused where compliance was IMPOSSIBLE

Louisiana Bar Exam July 2023- Created By Maryclaire Farrington (19 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions