Podcast
Questions and Answers
What factor does NOT contribute to determining the magnitude of risk according to the hand formula?
What factor does NOT contribute to determining the magnitude of risk according to the hand formula?
In tort law, which type of tort is characterized by an actor intending to invade a legally protected interest of another person?
In tort law, which type of tort is characterized by an actor intending to invade a legally protected interest of another person?
Which of the following theories allows for recovery without proof of fault?
Which of the following theories allows for recovery without proof of fault?
Which test evaluates if a defendant's conduct is a proximate cause based on the importance of the conduct relative to other causes?
Which test evaluates if a defendant's conduct is a proximate cause based on the importance of the conduct relative to other causes?
Signup and view all the answers
What defines negligence per se in statutory violation proofs?
What defines negligence per se in statutory violation proofs?
Signup and view all the answers
In the foreseeability test for proximate cause, which aspect is evaluated?
In the foreseeability test for proximate cause, which aspect is evaluated?
Signup and view all the answers
Which of the following is NOT a factor in the directness test for determining proximate cause?
Which of the following is NOT a factor in the directness test for determining proximate cause?
Signup and view all the answers
What approach imposes liability only for injuries that fall within the scope of the risk which justified a finding of negligence?
What approach imposes liability only for injuries that fall within the scope of the risk which justified a finding of negligence?
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Factors in Determining Risk Magnitude
- Social value attached to interests by the law
- Extent actor's conduct will affect interests
- Extent of potential harm
- Number of people affected
Tort Law Theories of Recovery
- Intentional torts: Actor intends harm to a protected interest.
- Unintentional torts: Actor creates an unreasonable risk of harm.
- Strict liability: Imposes liability regardless of blameworthiness.
Statutory Violation Proofs
- Strict liability: No proof of fault allowed.
- Negligence per se: Statute violation inherently negligent (some exceptions allowed).
- Evidence of negligence: Statute violation as evidence of negligence.
Determining Proximate Cause
- Directness test: Direct link between defendant's act and plaintiff's harm, no intervening forces.
- Substantial factor test: Defendant's conduct significantly contributed to the harm.
- Foreseeability test: Harm caused foreseeable by defendant's action.
- Risk standard: Liability for injuries within the scope of foreseeable risk.
Reasonable Person Standard
- Standard used to define negligence.
- Varies based on emergency circumstances and dangerous instrumentalities.
- Factors to consider include skills, knowledge, and experience of the actor.
Range of Application of the RPS
- Degree of care proportional to the danger involved.
- Emergencies considered in determining reasonable conduct.
- Dangerous instrumentalities necessitate higher degrees of care.
Recklessness
- Actor's conduct is careless when risk of harm is evident.
- Conscientious disregard of substantial risk.
- Significant indifference to risk of harm.
Proving Breach
- Plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant breached a duty.
- Statutory violation may be proof of negligence.
- Evidence needed to support a breach of duty.
Industry Customs
- Evidence of industry customs is relevant to negligence but not definitive.
- Customary practices are considered in determining negligence.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
- Presumption of negligence based on the nature of the injury.
- Plaintiff must meet burden of proof.
- Incident not usually occurring without negligence.
Cause-in-Fact (But-for Test)
- Injury would not have occurred "but for" the defendant's actions.
- Demonstrating causation requires showing the injury was directly caused by the defendant.
Alternative Tests of Cause-in-Fact
- Multiple Sufficient Causes: Multiple parties jointly cause an indivisible injury, and all are responsible.
- Alternative Liability: Parties who acted negligently and their injuries overlap and cannot be assigned to a single party, each one is liable.
Limits on Liability
- Foreseeability limits extent of liability.
- Consideration of intervening/superseding actions.
- Proximate and cause-in-fact analysis.
Comparative Fault
- Pure comparative negligence: Plaintiff's negligence reduces, but does not eliminate, damages.
- Modified comparative negligence: Plaintiff's negligence must be below a certain threshold to recover damages.
Assumption of Risk
- Express assumption: Voluntary agreement to accept risks.
- Implied assumption: Knowledge of and acceptance of risk.
Medical Professional Standard
- Similar care exercised by comparable professionals in similar situations.
- Adherence to similar standards of care in medical decisions.
- Expert testimony usually required to determine negligence.
Informed Consent
- Patients must be informed of risks and benefits of procedures before they consent/agree.
- Failure to disclose material risks may result in liability.
Owners and Occupiers of Land
- Duty to trespassers varies.
- Duty to licensees and invitees varies.
- Duty to discovered/tolerated trespassers.
Immunity
- Parental immunity
- State-specific exemptions.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Related Documents
Description
Explore the intricacies of tort law, including factors that determine risk magnitude and various theories of recovery. This quiz addresses intentional and unintentional torts, as well as statutory violations and proofs. Test your understanding of proximate cause and liability standards in torts.
