Torts 3.0 Flashcards Preview

NY/ MBE Bar Study > Torts 3.0 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Torts 3.0 Deck (16):

What duty is owed if a discovered trespasser is hurt by an activity being conducted by occupier or her employees?

duty of care of reasonably prudent person acting under similar circumstances


IF trespasser encounters dangerous condition on occupiers land, what 4 part test must be met before occupiers duty will extend?

1. condition is artifical (man-made)
2. condition is highly dangerous
3. condition is concealed from trespasser (not obvious)
4. occupier had advance knowledge of dangerous condition


What is a licensee?

social guest who confers no economic benefit on land


What is a invitee?

on land for commerical purposes


What duty of care/ conditional protections does an occupier owe an invitee?

Duty- reasonable prudent person
Protect- from concealed conditions occupier knows of/ should have known of


What duty of care/. conditional protections does an occupier owe a licensee?

Duty- reasonable prudent person
protect- from concealed conditions that were known in advance of licensee's injury


What 2 factors must be apparent for a P to bring a negligence per se claim?

1. P member of class statute seeks to protect
2. type of accident is w/in class of risks statute meant to prevent


What are the 2 key exceptions to the negligence per se rule?

statute cannot be used to prove neg if...
1. compliance w/ stat is more dangerous than actual violation
2. compliance impossible under circumstances


When will the general rule that no duty to rescue exists not be applied? (2)

1. when D is cause of P/ victims peril
2. when pre-exisiting relationship b/w parties (ex. family, occupiers to invitees)
- both contemplate an expectation created by Ds conduct


What 2 key factors must be shown by a P in a negligent infliction of emtotional distress (NIED) claim?

1. P victim who was in the ZOD was exposed to risk of injury
2. P shows subsequent physical manifestations of distress


What sort of cases does the term res ipsa loquitur refer?

cases where proof of negligence is self-evident; ususally applies when P lacks info of D's wrongful conduct


What 2 factors must be shown by a P offering a res ipsa loquitur claim?

1. accident is 1 normally associated w/ neg
2. instrument causing injury was w/in exclusive control of D (show by prep of evidence - more likely than not)


What is the main test to establish factual causation?

But for test: P's harm would not have occured but for D's conduct


What must be true for D's conduct to be established as the proximate cause of P's harm?

foreseeability: consequences of D's conduct are foreseeable at the time of act
-intervening causes generally not affect foreseeability or Ds liablity


What 4 types of indirect intervening causes have no impact on D's liability?

1. medical malpractice
2. negligent rescue
3. protection reaction forces (panic of others causing further injury)
4. subsequent accident or disease


What 3 types of causes are deemed superceding intervening causes such that D's liabiity is cut off?

chain of causation broken by
1. extraordinary weather conditions
2. extraordinary coincidences