IL major distinctions Flashcards Preview

Bar Torts > IL major distinctions > Flashcards

Flashcards in IL major distinctions Deck (12):
1

Defamation- Private persons must prove

NEGLIGENCE
- A private person bringing a defamation action must prove that the D made the statement with negligence, EVEN IF IT DOES NOT INVOLVE A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN

2

Landowner duty

- ORDINARY CARE TO INVITEES AND LICENSES
IL does NOT distinguish b/w invitees and licensees- both are owed a duty of ORDINARY CARE
- IL has not changed the trespass rules

3

Violation of statute is what in IL

Violation of statute is only PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE of negligence
- rather than negligence per se (conclusive presumption of negligence)"

4

zone of danger std for bystanders suing for emotional distress

IL: a bystander who sees someone negligently injured by a tortfeasor CANNOT recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress if she was not
1) W/I ZONE OF DANGER
2) even when she is closely related to the victim.

5

partial comparative negligence

IL has adopted PARTIAL COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE
- A p is barred from recovery if he is more than 50% at fault

6

when is a P barred from recover under partial comparative negligence in IL

when the P is more than 50% at fault

7

P's fault in strict liability actions

- If P in strict liability action was contributory negligent, first determine the nature of P's negligence

1) a P KNOWINGLY contributory negligence/ implied assumption of the risk WILL reduce or bar the P's recovery depending on the degree of their fault, because IL applies its comparative negligence statues to this case

2) P's UNKNOWINGLY or passive contributory negligence (such as failure to discover or guard against an unknown risk) is NOT A DEFENSE;
- IL does not apply its comparative negligence statute in these cases.
- P recovers everything

8

In IL under strict liability what if P's UNKNOWINGLY or passive contributory negligence happened

(such as failure to discover or guard against an unknown risk) is NOT A DEFENSE;
- IL does not apply its comparative negligence statute in these cases.
- P recovers everything

9

IN IL under strict liability what if P's KNOWINGLY contributory negligence/ implied assumption of the risk will do?

WILL reduce or bar the P's recovery depending on the degree of their fault, because IL applies its comparative negligence statues` to this case

10

Parent liability for childs tort

Parents are liable for their child's WILLFUL OR MALICIOUS torts up to $20,000

11

what are parents held for kids torts in IL

Parents are liable for their child's WILLFUL OR MALICIOUS torts up to $20,000

12

Tender years

a child under the age of 7 is presumed not to be responsible for his acts.

- Remains for a child b/w ages of 7-14, but this presumption can be overcome by proof of the intelligence and capacity of the child.

-A child who is 14 or older, who engages in adult activity is held to an adult std of care