Torts Flashcards

(50 cards)

1
Q

Battery

A
  1. Volitional Act by D that causes harmful or offensive contact to a P’s person
  2. Intent to cause the harmful offensive contact
  3. Causation

Offensive == unpermitted
Person == anything one carries
contact includes delayed contact (e.g., poisoned sandwich)

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

Intentional Torts

A

Act
Intent
Causation

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

Assault

A

Act by D with intent to cause reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact with the person

Victim’s fear not required, apparent ability to cause the contact is sufficient, and mere words not enough but words can negate the effect
Knowledge of act is required for the victim

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

False imprisonment

A

Act /Omission by D causing unlawful confinement of P
in a bounded area

Barriers can be physical or indirect. threatened
Awareness of or harm from confinement required

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

Intentional lInfliction of Emotional Distress

A

Act by D
amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct beyond bounds of civility
with intent to cause extreme distress (recklessness is sufficient)
and P did suffer extreme distress

Extreme Outrageous : Even otherwise normal conduct can become extreme if
- continuous,
- by common carriers/innkeeprers
- directed towards children, elderly, pregnant women, adults with known supersensitivities

Damages needed ( not necessarily proof of physical injuries though)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Trespass to Land

A

D’s act of physical invasion of P’s land

  • even if D unaware it was P’s land : as long as act was deliberate sufficient
  • invasion by something tangible (sound/light not sufficient)

No need for harm

Land includes air above and soil below - including PASS THROUGH invasion (ball throw across backyard air space)

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

Trespass to Chattels

A

Intentional interference by D
with P’s possessor interest in persona property
warranting damages

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

Conversion

A

So serious a trespass to the chattel that compensation at its full market value is warranted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Affirmative Defenses:

A

Consent
Protective Privileges
Necessity

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

Consent Defense

A

Needs to be VALID
All 7 intentional Torts (sliding scale for age/intellectual incapacity)

Act needs to be within SCOPE of consent
- written/oral express (except fraud , duress)
- implied - by social custom or usage
- body language ( reasonable interpretation of ind obj conduct and surrounding circumstances e.g., handshake where offered)

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

Protective Privilege Defense

A

Self-Defense:
Should be responding to threat from P,
- threat must be imminent (heat of moment) and response timed right
- D must have reasonable belief that the threat is genuine

Reasonable mistake of fact : still defense not negated
Defense has to be proportional to the threatened force

Defense of Others:

Defense of Property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Necessity Defense

A

Public Necessity : Absolute Defense
- unfolding emergency and D’s property tort was to save community
- no need to compensate for any damages incurred

Private necessity: Qualified Defense
- emergency and iD’s tort was only to protect his own property
- need to compensate for tort wrong/damages incurred or for entering

D who comes in privilege of necessity can state as long as the emergency continues and P who kicks him out his liable for D’s harm once kicked out

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

Negligence

A

Duty to conform to a specific std of care for protection of P against unreasonable risk of harm (Default Std of care : That adopted by a reasonable prudent person - regardless of mental /experience deficiencies)

Breach of the duty by D

Causation : Actual : But for causation

Causation Proximate : Foreseeability

Damages: Actual

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Conversion

A

The interference with P’s possessory interest is so serious as to warrant a compensation by D to P of the full market value of the tangible personal property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Negligence Std of Care: Children

A

Std of a hypothetical child of like age, intelligence, and experience acting under similar circumstances

VA: <7 - no duty
7-14 rebuttable presumption of no duty with increasing reputability with closer age to 14

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Negligence Std of Care: Professionals

A

Skill and knowledge commensurate with the national average professional of same profession or occupation in good standing

Need to conform to customary practices in the field of profession

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

Negligence Std of Care to Entrants on property : Premises Liability

A

Trespassers
- Unknown Trespassers : No Duty
- Known Trespassers: Duty to remove/repair/warn about
artificial, concealed, highly-dangerous conditions known to D (man-made death traps, no need to inspect)

Licensees (come in for their own benefit)
Duty to remove/repair/warn about concealed and dangerous conditions known to D (all known traps, no need to inspect)

Invitees (common for D’s benefit)
Duty to remove/repair/warn about all dangerous conditions known and knowable to D after reasonable inspection (all knowable traps, D must inspect)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Trespassing Children - Attractive Nuisance

A

D’s duty to remove/repair a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm to children caused by dangerous, artificial condition on property (known death trap)

No Attractive Nuisance doctrine in VA but just that a higher std of care when children are concerned

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

Lessor - Lessee Duties

A

Lessee (tenant) : duty to maintain premises

Lessor (Landlord) : duty to warn of knowable existing defects/dangerous conditions with reasonable inspection

If lessor volunteers to repair - liable for damages if negligent

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

Negligence Std of Care: Statutory - Negligence Per se

A

Criminal penalties for D if
- P is within protected class per statute and
- statute designed to prevent the type of harm that P suffered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Negligence Std of Care: Defenses - Negligence Per se

A

(1) compliance would cause even more harm than violation of statute
(2) Compliance was beyond D’s control

22
Q

Negligence Std of Care owed by Bailee

A

(1) If Bailment for sole benefit of the bailor - a low standard of care;
(2) If Bailment for sole benefit of the the bailee - a high standard of care; and
(3) for a mutual benefit bailment (typically a bailment for hire), there is the ordinary care standard.

23
Q

Rescuer Duty of Care

A

No affirmative duty to rescue
BUT once attempted
Ordinary std of care

24
Q

Negligence Std of Care owed by Bailor

A

(1) For a sole benefit of the bailee bailment, the bailor must inform the bailee of known, dangerous defects in the chattel.

(2) For a bailment for hire, the bailor must inform the bailee of chattel defects of which they are or should be aware.

25
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Pure Emotional Distress Cases : (1) The plaintiff must be within the “zone of danger” (2) The plaintiff must suffer physical symptoms from the distress
26
NIED Types and showing required
- Near Miss - show it was actually near miss and there was a physical manifestation of the distress - Bystander III party injured - victims was close family member (spouse, parent, minor child) and he was right there observing the events - Business Relationship : show emotional distress is highly foreseeable given the nature of business and relationship (e.g., patient/med lab false positive, customer/funeral parlor)
27
Affirmative Duty to Act
(1) special relationship (e.g., common carriers, innkeeper, shopkeeper, parent-child) (2) D's conduct caused the peril (3) D assumed duty by initiating rescue : also see Good Samaritan Statutes.
28
Res Ipsa Loquitor
Jury can infer (w/o evidence) breach of duty by D and NO directed verdict for D allowed, if (1) accident or injury is the kind that occurs normally when associated with negligence, AND (2) negligence is probably attributable to someone in D's position Jury can reject it too and find for D
29
But-for causation : Substantial factor Test
Merged causes - two or more cases each of which can sue the injury harm: all held liable
30
But-for causation : Unascertainable Causes Test
Two causes - only one inflicted the injury but cannot identify - Burden shift to Defendants to show why their negligence is not the casue
31
Proximate Casuation
Foreseeability Test : Scope: D is liable for all injuries cause by foreseeable intervening forces whose risk increased because of D's negligence Rough factors: passage of time, geographic distance, prior occurrence Always foreseeable by precedence: med malpractice, rescuers negligence, reactionary/protectionary forces by D and onlookers, follow on disease/injury from initial injury due to negligence
32
Negligence : Damages
Economic + personal (pain and suffering) Egg-shell Skull Doctrine: D takes the P as they are- has to compensate for all damages however unforeseeable Punitive - if wanton and willful negligence
33
Negligence Damages : Duty to mitigate
P has duty to take reasonable steps to reduce /mitigate harm
34
Negligence Damages : Collateral Source Rule
Damages Are Not reduced just because there is a collateral source to provide benefits to P
35
Contributory Negligence
Contributary negligence completely bars P's right to recover EXCEPT : Last clear chance doctrine: - person with the last clear chance to avoid the accident and fails to do so is liable for negligence Helpless Peril: If P is in helpless peril D is liable if D knew or should've known of P's peril Inattentive Peril: If P is in inattentive peril, D is liable ONLY if D knows of P's peril
36
Comparative Negligence:
Majority - Partial Comparative: P's recovery (and D's if counterclaimed) barred if P(or D) was responsible for more % of negligence causing injury than all Ds (other parties) combined Pure Comparative: P receives recovery even if more at fault than all Ds combined and vice versa : each party's damages will be offset by the act they have to pay out
37
Strict Liability
1. Dangerous wild animals or domestic w known dangerous propensity 2. Abnormally Dangerous Activity (a) creates foreseeable risk even w reasonable care (b) not of common usage in community 3. Products liability sub category
38
Products Liability Theories
1. Intentional 2. Negligence 3. Implied Warranties of merchantability for particular purpose 4. Misrepresentation / express warranty 5. strict products liability
39
Strict Products Liability
1. D is a merchant of goods (commercial supplier of goods NOT SERVICES) - includes commercial lessors though, and includes the entire supply chain 2. product is defective 3. Product was not substantially altered after leaving D's exclusive control 4. P was making a foreseeable use of product
40
Strict Products Liability : Defect Categories
(a) manufacture defect : did not meet std for the design (b) design defect: there was better alternative design safer, practical and economically feasible (c) information defect: failure to provide adequate instructions/warnings to risks involved in using product in manner apparent to users (comprehensible, incl mitigating info)
41
Nuisance
Substantial and unreasonable Interference with P's right to quite use and enjoyment of property Can be intentional or Negligent Scenarios: inconsistent land use, spiteful neighbor, grossly inconsiderate
42
Vicarious Liability
D was passive but still liable derivatively because: 1. harm occurred from D's employees action within the scope of employment at time of injury 2. Still liable if employee was on a minor detour D not liable if employee was "off on frolic" Hirer's of Independent Contractors NOT liable for contractors actions UNLESS hired to work on premises (non delegable duty to keep premises safe
43
Vicarious Liability : Intentional Torts and Exception
Generally Employer is NOT liable for Intentional torts by employees Unless - force authorize by employer - force applied in the course of furthering the business of the employer ( e.g., bouncer) - friction generated by nature of employment ( e.g., bills collector)
44
Defamation
1. D made defamatory statement about P 2. identifying P 3. to a third party 4. the defamatory statement was false ( P's burden) 5. D at fault (usually negligence - public figure : show malice) 6. Damage to P's reputation - Libel (written/permanent) - can be per se - slander (oral) - show it affected business, was about a serious crime of "moral turpitude", or loathsome disease
45
Privacy Causes of Action - Appropriation
To attract consumer with likeness/image w/o permission (Exception Newsworthiness)
46
Privacy Causes of Action
1. Appropriation 2. Intrusion 3. False Light 4. Disclosure
47
Privacy Causes of Action - Intrusion
Invasion of P's seclude that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person
48
Privacy Causes of Action - False Light
Disseminating information that may be true but places P in false light
49
Privacy Causes of Action - Public Disclosure
Public disclosure of private facts about the P
50