Goals and Basics of Tort Law

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.

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

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.

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

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

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

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

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

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

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>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.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A civil wrong involving intentional, unwanted physical contact that results in injury, pain, or illness.

The legal principle where someone intends to harm one person but accidentally harms another. The intent to harm the original target transfers to the unintended victim, making the actor liable for the harm to the second person.

A harmful contact that occurs as a result of actions done remotely, like sending a strobe light gif to someone with epilepsy.

The standard of proof in a civil case. The plaintiff must show more than 50% likelihood that the defendant's actions caused the harm.

A civil wrong committed with the intent to cause harm, rather than by accident or negligence.

Gross carelessness resulting in harm.

A child can be held liable for their actions, particularly intentional torts, even if they lack full understanding of their action. Age may matter in determining intent.

Discriminatory actions based on religious beliefs.

A person is liable for FI if they intentionally confine another person within a limited area without privilege or consent, for an appreciable time, and the person is aware of or harmed by the confinement.

The act of purposefully preventing someone from moving freely.

A way of confining someone through actual force or the threat of force, like pointing a weapon.

Confining someone by falsely claiming legal authority, like saying "police are on their way".

The confined space must be clear-cut; the person must be unable to move in any direction.

The confinement must last for a noticeable duration, not just a short time.

Justification or agreement for the confinement, such as a valid arrest or an agreement to stay.

The person confined must know they are restricted; a person unknowingly restrained isn't false imprisonment.

A merchant can detain a suspected shoplifter for a reasonable time and manner with probable cause.

Agreement to an action demonstrated by the circumstances or inaction, understood reasonably.

Agreement stated in words (e.g., verbally, written agreement).

Express or implied communication to cease consent; Must be communicated to be valid.

Limits of permitted action under consent; exceeding the scope is a violation.

Inability to give valid consent due to factors like youth, intoxication, or mental health.

Defendant believed the plaintiff consented, based on situation; must be rational, reasonable.

Removing duty to retreat before using force in self-defense.

A failure to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm to another person or property.

The obligation to act reasonably to avoid causing foreseeable harm to others.

Failing to meet the standard of care expected from a reasonable person in similar circumstances.

The benchmark for evaluating whether someone acted negligently; it considers how a typical, prudent individual would have acted in the same situation.

The ability of a reasonable person to anticipate that their actions might lead to harm.

A legally recognized injury suffered by a person as a result of another's actions.

A direct link between a person's actions and another person's injury (but-for).

The extent of responsibility a person has for the harm they cause.

A driver must exercise the level of care that a reasonable person would use to minimize risks of foreseeable harm while driving. This standard applies to situations where the driver isn't doing anything particularly dangerous or specialized.

A higher standard of care than ordinary reasonable care, often required in situations involving increased risk or vulnerability. This might include special precautions or expertise.

If someone has superior skills or knowledge, they are required to use those abilities in a way that's reasonable under the circumstances. They can't just ignore their special talents.

Minors operating motor vehicles are held to the same standard of care as adults. They are not given a lower standard, even though they are younger.

When a minor is involved in a situation not involving driving, their standard of care is judged by the reasonably careful minor of their age, maturity, and experience.

A driver must anticipate potential risks & take precautions to avoid harm that could reasonably be foreseen or expected to occur based on the circumstances.

The level of care that a reasonable person would use in a particular situation. This can be ordinary or extraordinary care, depending on the circumstances.

The standard of conduct expected of a reasonably prudent person in similar circumstances. It's the baseline for assessing negligence.

Adjusting the standard of reasonable care based on factors like age, physical disabilities, or professional expertise.

Actions that have the potential to cause harm to others. This triggers a duty of reasonable care.

Behavior that doesn't pose a risk of harm, generally not requiring a duty of care. Exceptions exist for premises liability, rescue, and control.

The duty of care a landowner owes to people on their property. The level of care varies depending on the visitor's status.

A special duty of care arises in certain relationships (e.g., school, parent-child) where reliance and vulnerability are present.

A person invited onto property for a commercial purpose or for a museum visit.

A guest invited onto property, not for commercial benefit. The landowner owes a duty to warn of known dangers.