TORTS Flashcards
(180 cards)
What is required for a prima facie case for intentional tort liability?
(Burden of proof => Plaintiff)
1) D’s intent
- Specific (D’s purpose is to bring about these consequences)
- General (D knows with substantial certainty that the consequences will result)
- NO need to intend for injury to occur (as long as D’s intent caused harmful result)
2) Causation
- D’s conduct is ‘substantial factor’ in resulting injury (almost always is)
3) D’s act
- Volitional movement on D’s part (D’s will)
What is the rule for transferred intent?
Allows:
1) Intent as to one tort to qualify as intent for another tort, and;
2) Intent as to one person to qualify as intent as to another person; applies to:
- Battery
- Assault
- False imprisonment
- Trespass to land
- Trespass to chattel
What is required for battery?
1) Intentionally causing
- Direct
- Indirect (D’s act sets in motion a force that brings about harmful/offensive contact)
2) a harmful or offensive
Harmful (actual injury/disfigurement)
- Offensive (NO consent implied from reasonable person based on P’s conduct/circumstances, e.g. saving pedestrian from car accident, whether safe to do so)
- Offensive (embarassment)
- NO P’s awareness required
3) bodily contact with another person
- P’s body
- Anything connected to P’s body
- Create situation likely to harm P
- NOT animals
What is the difference between intentional torts to person and negligence in terms of damages?
Intentional torts to person:
- NO damages required (UNLESS IIED)
- Nominal damages recoverable (UNLESS IIED)
- Punitive damages recoverable (D’s malice)
Negligence:
- Damages required
- NO nominal damages recoverable
- NO punitive damages recoverable
What is the difference between intentional torts to the person and IIED?
Battery/Assault/False imprisonment
- Intent required
- Nominal damages
- Punitive damages
IIED
- Intent/Recklessness required
- Actual damages (for severe emotional distress)
What is required for assault?
1) Intentionally placing a person in
2) reasonable apprehension of an
- NOT exaggerated fears of contact
- Knowledge of assault required (unlike battery)
- NO knowledge of D’s identity required
- D’s apparent ability to commit battery
- Words + Overt act (otherwise words alone can negate assault)
3) imminent
- NOT unloaded gun + awareness of unloaded gun
4) harmful or offensive contact
What is required for false imprisonment?
1) An intentional
2) act of restraint on another person causing that person’s
- D’s physical barriers
- D’s physical force vs P/P’s family/P’s property
- D’s direct/indirect (reasonable) threat of force vs P/P’s family/P’s property
- D’s failure to release P when under legal affirmative duty to do so
- D’s invalid use of legal authority (false arrest)
- NOT moral pressure
3) confinement within bounded area
- P’s freedom of movement is limited in ALL directions
- NO reasonable means of escape + Known to P or harmed by confinement
- OTHERWISE shoplifer’s privilege allowed
Does the length of time of false imprisonment matter?
No
Must Plaintiff resist physical force used in false imprisonment?
No
What is required for intentional infliction of emotional distress?
1) Extreme + Outrageous conduct that
- Transcends all bounds of decency tolerated by society
- NO physical injury
2) intentionally or recklessly causes a person to suffer
3) severe emotional distress
‘Severe’ emotional distress (More outrageous; Less damages required)
- NO physical injury or medical diagnosis required
4) causation
- Actual: Plaintiff
- Proximate: Bystander case
What are examples of extreme and outrageous conduct?
Extreme business conduct
- Continuous methods of bill collection
Misuse of authority
- School threats/bullying
Offensive/Insulting language
- P has special relationship with D
- D knows of P’s sensitivity
Common carrier/inkeeper’s conduct vs P (patron)
Known sensitivites
- Children
- Pregnant women
- Elderly people
What is required for Bystander IIED?
Plaintiff-Bystander must show the D intentionally or recklessly caused severe emotional distress to:
1) A member of the victim’s family who is present at the time, even if such distress does not result in bodily harm; or
2) To any other person who is present at the time, if such distress results in bodily harm
What is the difference between negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress?
NIED
- Was in the zone of danger (risk of physical harm) and suffered physical symptoms of distress
- Observed a close relative suffering physical harm
- D damaged the dead body of the plaintiff’s close relative; or
- D misinformed the plaintiff that a relative died or was seriously injured
IIED
- D’s knowledge of P’s presence + close relation
- Severe emotional distress
- Extreme + Outrageous conduct
What is required for trespass to land?
1) Intentionally entering or remaining on (or causing another person or object to enter or remain on)
- Knowledge with substantial certainty of objects entering the land (NOT intent to trespass)
- D’s mental state NOT relevant
2) another’s person’s real property
3) without permission (damage to land is not required and includes the space above/below the ground)
What is the difference between the intentional torts to property?
Trespass to land
- NO damage required
Trespass to chattel/Conversion
- Damage required
What is the difference between intentional and negligent trespass over property in terms of damage?
Intentional trespass
- NO damage required
Negligent trespass
- Damage required
What is required for trespass to chattel?
1) An act that
2) intentionally
- Cause interference (NOT trespass)
- D’s mistake of chattel NOT relevant
3) interferes with (less serious than conversion)
- Intermeddling (direct damage)
- Dispossession (deprive P’s right)
4) another’s personal property (interference must cause dispossession of, cause harm to, or reduce the value of the chattel)
What remedies are available for trespass to chattel?
Direct damage/Loss of use
- Actual damages
Dispossession
- Damages (rental value)
What is required for conversion?
1) An act causing
- Cause interference (NOT trespass)
- Includes BFP
- D’s mistake of chattel NOT relevant
2) serious and substantial interference with or destruction of
- Wrongful acquisition (theft/embezzlement)
- Wrongful transfer (sale/misdelivery)
- Wrongful detention (refuse to return)
- Substantial change
- Severe damage/destruction
- Misuse of chattel
3) another’s personal property (substantial interference justifies the defendant pay the full value of the personal property)
What remedies are available for conversion?
Damages
- Fair market value (at time of conversion)
Replevin
- Return of chattel
What is the difference between trespass to chattel and conversion?
Trespass to chattel
- Less serious interference (damages < 50% of fair market value)
- Remedies: Actual damages/Rental value for dispossession
Conversion
- More serious interference (damages > 50% of fair market value)
- Remedies: Replevin/Fair market value at time of conversion
What is required for consent?
1) Valid consent (capacity)
- Express (NO known mistake by D/NO fraudulent inducement NOT re collateral matter/NO immediate duress)
- Implied (Apparent consent that reasonable person would infer from P’s conduct or custom/Consent implied by law like emergencies)
2) Not exceed scope of consent
- Not to do something substantially different
3) NOT criminal act
- Consent NOT applicable to crimes (majority view)
What is required for self-defense?
1) D reasonably believes/mistaken that he will be attacked
- UNLESS duty to retreat ‘safely’ (NOT from D’s own dwelling)
- UNLESS D is initial aggressor (NOT D using non-deadly force then P using deadly force)
- UNLESS injures TP bystander ‘intentionally’ (liable to TP)
2) D may use force as ‘reasonably necessary’ as it appears to prevent harm
- If serious injury likely => Can commit death/serious bodily injury
3) To prevent commission of tort
- NOT already committed tort (NO retaliation allowed)
What is required for defense of others?
1) D reasonably believes/mistaken that aided person had right to self-defense
- Even if aided person was initial aggressor
2) D may use ‘as much force’ as he could have in self-defense