Goals and Basics of Tort Law

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What are the key elements required to establish false imprisonment?

The key elements are intentional confinement, within a limited area, without privilege or consent, for any appreciable time, and the victim must be aware of the confinement.

In the McCann v Wal-Mart case, what actions demonstrated the intent to confine?

Employees blocking the exit, claiming the police were coming, and physically preventing the individuals from leaving showed intent to confine.

How does the Knowlton v Ross case differentiate between confinement and voluntary action?

In Knowlton v Ross, the court found no false imprisonment because the plaintiff entered the room voluntarily and did not face a threat to prevent her departure.

What constitutes a 'false assertion of legal authority' in the context of false imprisonment?

A false assertion of legal authority occurs when someone falsely claims to have the power to detain another person, such as claiming to be a police officer and insisting the person must stay. Signup and view all the answers

Explain the role of awareness in the context of false imprisonment.

The victim must be aware of the confinement for it to qualify as false imprisonment, meaning they must recognize they are being restricted from leaving. Signup and view all the answers

What does the concept of 'duress' entail regarding false imprisonment?

Duress refers to a situation where a person is compelled to act against their will due to threats or force, which contributes to a claim of false imprisonment. Signup and view all the answers

How do affirmative defenses relate to intentional torts like false imprisonment?

Affirmative defenses can be invoked when the court finds that the defendant has committed an intentional tort, providing justification for their actions. Signup and view all the answers

Why is physical force an important factor in establishing false imprisonment?

Physical force is crucial because it directly restricts an individual's freedom of movement, meeting one of the primary criteria for false imprisonment. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, why was the employer's decision to switch back to pork meatballs considered offensive?

The employer disregarded the employees' religious beliefs, which was held to be offensive to a reasonable person's sense of dignity. Signup and view all the answers

In Garratt v. Dailey, what key factor did the court consider regarding the liability of a five-year-old child?

The court held that age doesn't matter legally as long as intent can be proven, but practically, a child's age is considered for their knowledge about potential consequences. Signup and view all the answers

What was the malicious intent involved in Eichenwald v. Rivello that led to finding the harmful contact?

Rivello intended to cause real physical harm to the reporter by sending a gif of a strobe light, knowing it could trigger a seizure due to the reporter's epilepsy. Signup and view all the answers

In Baska v. Scherzer, what was the outcome of the case concerning intent during a fight?

The court found that both defendants did not intend to strike Baska but their intent to harm each other transferred liability to her injury. Signup and view all the answers

How does the concept of 'transferred intent' apply in tort cases, as seen in Baska v. Scherzer?

Transferred intent applies when the intent to harm one person results in harm to another, making the original actors liable for the unintended injury. Signup and view all the answers

What criteria must be met for a case of harmful contact to be established?

There must be evidence of intentional contact that causes injury, physical impairment, pain, or illness. Signup and view all the answers

What role does intent play in determining liability for battery in the case of a minor, as seen in Garratt v. Dailey?

Intent is crucial; if a minor can demonstrate the necessary intent to cause the harmful contact, they may be held liable regardless of their age. Signup and view all the answers

How did the actions of Rivello in sending a strobe light gif constitute contact in Eichenwald v. Rivello?

Rivello's actions were deemed to have malicious intent aimed at causing harm, which was recognized as a form of physical contact leading to injury. Signup and view all the answers

What does the term 'Stand Your Ground' laws signify in the context of self-defense?

They remove the duty to retreat before using force, even deadly force, in self-defense. Signup and view all the answers

What is Shopkeeper's Privilege?

It allows a merchant to detain a person for a reasonable time to investigate if they believe the person has unlawfully taken merchandise. Signup and view all the answers

In what situations might consent be considered invalid?

Consent may be invalid if there is incapacity to consent due to fraud, being a minor, intoxication, or coercion. Signup and view all the answers

How can consent be demonstrated in a medical context?

Consent can be expressed verbally or implied through context, but must be communicated clearly to avoid misunderstandings. Signup and view all the answers

What constitutes a withdrawal of consent?

A withdrawal must be communicated clearly, either expressly or implicitly, otherwise the other party may continue their actions. Signup and view all the answers

What are the implications of 'implied consent'?

Implied consent arises through gestures, context, or even silence if a reasonable person would understand it to indicate consent. Signup and view all the answers

What is the difference between express and implied consent?

Express consent is clearly communicated in words, while implied consent is understood through actions or circumstances. Signup and view all the answers

How does a defendant's reasonable perception affect consent in a legal dispute?

The defendant's reasonable belief about the plaintiff's consent can affect the outcome in cases of alleged intentional torts. Signup and view all the answers

What constitutes the 'duty' element in negligence?

The duty element arises when engaging in conduct that creates risks, requiring individuals to exercise reasonable care towards others under the circumstances. Signup and view all the answers

Explain the significance of 'breach' in a negligence claim.

A breach occurs when the defendant's conduct falls below the standard of care expected of a reasonable person, often assessed by foreseeability of harm and actions taken to mitigate risks. Signup and view all the answers

Describe the role of 'actual harm' in a negligence lawsuit.

Actual harm refers to the legally cognizable injury that the plaintiff must prove, which is essential for establishing the occurrence of negligence. Signup and view all the answers

What is meant by 'scope of liability' in the context of negligence?

Scope of liability determines whether the harm caused by the defendant falls within the type of harm that their negligent conduct could typically foreseeably result in. Signup and view all the answers

How do exceptions to duty affect negligence standards?

Exceptions to duty, such as for individuals with physical disabilities or children, adjust the standard of care based on the defendant's age, knowledge, and skills. Signup and view all the answers

What does the case Hammontree v Jenner illustrate about foreseeability in negligence?

Hammontree v Jenner illustrates that foreseeability is determined by whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would have anticipated the risk resulting from their actions. Signup and view all the answers

Explain the concept of 'implied consent' in the context of the Hudgens hypo.

Implied consent occurs when an individual's inaction or responses, such as lying down while coworkers touch them, suggest agreement to those actions unless they withdraw consent through struggle or objection. Signup and view all the answers

Summarize the basic standard for assessing negligence.

The basic standard for assessing negligence states that a reasonable prudent person would foresee potential harm and take adequate measures to avoid or mitigate that risk. Signup and view all the answers

What was the main legal issue in Stewart v Motts regarding the standard of care?

The main issue was whether the jury should be instructed to consider a standard of 'extraordinary care' due to the circumstances of the case. Signup and view all the answers

In Hills v Sparks, what was the significance of the defendant’s knowledge and experience with the dangerous machine?

The significance was that the defendant was required to exercise a higher standard of care due to his superior knowledge and skill. Signup and view all the answers

How did the court in Stevens v Veenstra rule regarding the standard of care expected from a minor?

The court ruled that a minor operating a vehicle is expected to meet the same standard of care as any adult driver. Signup and view all the answers

What was the outcome of Shepherd v Gardner Wholesale Inc regarding the plaintiff's visibility issue?

The case raised questions about the appropriateness of the sidewalk condition versus the plaintiff's visibility issues due to cataracts. Signup and view all the answers

What does the term 'extraordinary care' refer to in the context of negligence law?

Extraordinary care refers to a heightened standard of responsibility that may be sought in certain high-risk situations. Signup and view all the answers

What legal principle can be derived from Hills v Sparks regarding actors with higher qualifications?

Actors with superior qualifications are held to a higher standard of care than the average person. Signup and view all the answers

What was the jury's initial instruction in Stevens v Veenstra, and why was it considered incorrect?

The jury was initially instructed that the minor was held to a different standard of care, which was incorrect because it undermined public safety. Signup and view all the answers

How does the concept of 'reasonable care' apply differently to adults and minors in negligence cases?

Reasonable care for minors is judged based on their age, experience, and mental capacity, unlike adults who adhere to a universal standard. Signup and view all the answers

How does the court view the duty of care for individuals with physical disabilities in negligence cases?

The court holds that individuals with physical disabilities are not expected to exercise a higher degree of care than a person with normal capabilities. Signup and view all the answers

What is the default standard of reasonable care for children engaged in activities?

The default standard considers the contextualization of children performing 'kid things', which may require a different expectation of care. Signup and view all the answers

What duty does a defendant owe when engaging in risk-creating conduct?

The defendant owes a duty of reasonable care to everyone when engaged in risk-creating conduct involving managing persons or property. Signup and view all the answers

Under what circumstances does a defendant not owe a duty of care?

A defendant does not owe a duty of care when there is no risk of physical harm created by their actions. Signup and view all the answers

What obligations do landowners have towards invitees on their property?

Landowners have a duty to warn invitees of known dangers present on the property. Signup and view all the answers

What elements characterize the special relationship that creates a duty to rescue or protect?

Special relationships involve reliance and a reduced ability for individuals to care for themselves. Signup and view all the answers

How does California Civil Code §1714 relate to general duties of care?

California Civil Code §1714 imposes a general duty of reasonable care on individuals, overriding common law rules. Signup and view all the answers

What might still influence an entrant's recovery if status categories are abolished?

The foreseeability of injury due to conditions on the land may still affect an entrant's recovery. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Goals of Tort Law

Righting wrongs (moral duty)
Compensation to injured parties
Deter unreasonably risky or wrongful conduct
Promote independence among persons with disabilities

Intentional Torts

Battery
- Unconsented-to harmful or offensive contact
- Actor acts with purpose or substantial certainty to result in the contact
- Harmful or offensive contact directly or indirectly results
- Intent of battery
  - Purpose of causing harmful/offensive contact or
  - Knowledge that such contact was substantially certain to result
- Offensive contact of battery
  - Contact that offends a reasonable person's dignity
  - Harmful or injurious to a reasonable person's sense of dignity
  - The offensive test is objective
Assault
- Intentionally causing a reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful/offensive contact
- Harmful or offensive contact directly or indirectly
- Offensive contact
  - Harmfully or injuriously to a reasonable person's sense of dignity
False imprisonment
- Intentional confinement within a limited area
- Without privilege or consent
- For any appreciable time
- Aware of confinement or harmed by if
Defenses to Intentional Torts
- Affirmative Defenses:
  - Relevant when the other party has already proven the defendant committed the tort.
  - Self-defense:
    - Defendant perceives an actual or reasonably believed apparent threat to their safety.
    - The force employed was not excessive in degree or kind.
  - Consent:
    - Express consent
    - Implied consent
- Subsequent Neglience: - A subsequent negligent action by another person or entity
- Scope of Liability:
  - The scope of the harm reasonably foreseeable

Negligence

Elements of Negligence
- Duty: Owes a duty of reasonable care
- Breach: Falling below the standard of care
  - Foreseeability: A reasonable person would foresee their actions could cause harm.
  - Standard of care: Defendant's conduct must be measured against the standard of a reasonable person under similar circumstances
- Actual Harm/Injury: Provable physical injury
Negligence Per Se
- D’s violating a statute establishes the breach of duty
- Test for NPS:
  - Clear definition of the standard of conduct
  - The injury is within the class of harms the statute was intended to protect
  - The plaintiff was within the class of people the statute was intended to protect
  - Defendant violated the statute
  - The statute violation caused the harm
Factual Cause (But-For Causation):
- Was the defendant’s act the but-for cause?
- Was the defendant’s act a substantial factor?
- Were the defendant’s acts one in a series of events that led to the injury? Did it combine with another cause?
- Multiple Sufficient Causes
Multiple causes occurring simultaneously where each independently would have caused the harm
Scope of Liability
- The harm must be of the kind that makes the action negligent.
Defenses to Negligence
- Plaintiff’s Fault: Contributory Negligence (some states), Comparative Negligence (other states)
- Assumption of Risk: Express and implied—that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly encountered a risk.

Strict Liability

Liability without Fault:
- Usually for inherently dangerous activities
- Key to strict liability: The type of activity, indifferent to how the D acted
  - Examine the character or type of activity
    - Not the level of care exercised
      - If it's the type of activity that is subject to strict liability the defendant will be liable for any harm
      - Regardless of the level of care the defendant exercised.
Scope of liability -The scope of risk relates to the kinds of harms imposed by a risky activity, but some types of harm caused as a result of the risky activity might be outside the scope of liability.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Extreme and outrageous conduct must be engaged in for liability to be found.
A reasonable person would consider the conduct extreme.
Substantial emotional injury must be foreseeable as a result of the outrageous conduct.
The conduct is intended to cause or the actor knows to a substantial certainty severe emotional distress
Examples: - Coercive acts - Intimidation - Exploiting a vulnerability

Products Liability

Manufacturing Defect: The product departs from its intended design in production
Design Defect: The product has a design flaw that makes it unreasonably dangerous
Failure to Warn: The product should have come with a warning that adequately appraises users of risks involved.
Tests:
- Consumer expectations test:
Does the product meet customer expectations? Is it reasonably safe?
- Risk-utility test:
Does the benefit outweigh the risks?

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

This quiz covers the fundamental principles of tort law, including the goals of tort law and the specifics of intentional torts such as battery and assault. Test your understanding of key concepts including moral duties, unconsented contact, and the legal implications surrounding these acts.