Torts Overview and Intentional Tort: Battery

<p>If a family member witnesses the event</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>That purposeful acts deemed disgusting or insulting are considered offensive.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Proof of true damages suffered</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Ordinary contacts that are customary and necessary can be expected and accepted.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Flagrant abuses of power in a relationship</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Consent inferred from circumstances or actions that suggest willingness.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Mere insults and petty expressions</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Acts deemed unoffensive can become offensive once discomfort is communicated.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>It must be viewed differently than for acquaintances</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Whether public policy would allow for avoidance of such contact.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>That the conduct was intentional or reckless</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Consent can still be established through an action or inaction.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Social customs help establish what a reasonable person might find offensive.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The jury decides which standard to apply based on the testimonies.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They should refer patients to another qualified practitioner.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They should have expertise in the same area of medicine relevant to the case.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They are judged by the standards of nurses in similar practices.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They are judged by the standards of their specific specialty.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They owe a duty of reasonable care as per national standards set by accrediting bodies.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To adhere to the average level of care provided by similarly qualified practitioners.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>By their specific school of belief or practice.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>When a special relationship exists between the actor and the third person</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Reasonableness in the context of the situation</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If the lessor has knowledge of a defect that could cause harm</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If the tenant is aware of existing defects</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>That the other person is incapable of helping themselves</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Lessors owe no duty to trespassers unless they are aware of them</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Liability may arise if harm comes from leaving the person in a worse position</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Imposition of strict liability regardless of circumstances</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If the condition creates a risk that the possessor should have known would cause harm.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The possessor must actively create the dangerous condition.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The burden is on the plaintiff with a standard of preponderance of the evidence.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A balance of the utility of the condition versus the potential harm it may cause.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Standard of Care in fulfilling duty.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Keffe v Railroad</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Possessors need to actively inform all children of risks present.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The defendant created an unreasonable risk of harm.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The negligence of one defendant must not affect the other's negligence probability.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>All defendants who had control over the plaintiff or the instruments involved are potentially liable.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A higher degree of integration among defendants increases the likelihood of res ipsa being applicable.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The plaintiff must not have engaged in any voluntary actions leading to their injuries.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Jurors must identify the specific author of the wrong.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Defendants must be part of a coordinated team effort to be held liable.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>It is better for the injury to go without redress than to hold innocent parties responsible.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Massive and unforeseen injuries complicate identifying responsible parties.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>When they fail to exercise reasonable care in activities that endanger trespassers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To exercise reasonable care regarding the dangerous aspects of the land.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Liability arises if a hazardous condition attracts children who cannot understand the risks.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Understanding the presence of trespassers and acting with reasonable care.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A failure to warn specifically concerns dangers that are not readily discoverable by trespassers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A reasonable standard of care</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If they expect licensees will not realize the danger</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The attractiveness of the object causing harm</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A reduced standard of care is applicable</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Possessors may be liable if they knew of the risk to those individuals</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A possessor is liable for conditions they could have discovered</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The possessor had actual knowledge of the hazard</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A child wandering near a construction site with barriers</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If the defendant's actions leave the plaintiff in a worse position.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Ship owners must make strenuous efforts to rescue individuals who are overboard.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>When a defendant gives keys to a friend who is intoxicated.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The relationship between a captain and the crew aboard a ship.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A driver witnesses another driver swerving and does nothing.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Exclusive control can include the right to control the instrumentality causing the injury.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Individuals do not have an obligation to assist strangers in distress.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>If a defendant's initial help is reasonable, they remain liable even if stopped.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The instrumentality causing the injury must be under the exclusive control of the defendant.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Events that are rarely occurring cannot indicate negligence.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A defendant is only liable if a direct relationship with the third party exists.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Such events are typically without any negligence involved.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Rarity does not negate liability if negligence is present.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Multiple negligent parties can complicate the application of comparative negligence.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Prior knowledge of potential risks associated with hotel parties.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>It might reduce a plaintiff’s claim but does not eliminate a defendant’s liability.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They must ensure the passengers' safety while on their vessel.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>When the guest is intoxicated and injures a third party.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They cannot be held liable for individual injuries unless specifically legislated.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To warn them about any potential hazards on the property.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>There is no duty owed to unknown trespassers except for intentional harm.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Liability when a customer negligently injures another party after consuming alcohol.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Legislation explicitly creating liability for failing to protect individuals.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The intent to confine must be present.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Stopping someone from entering a building they have no right to access.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Complete control of an individual within defined boundaries.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A bouncer detaining someone suspected of theft until police arrive.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>They must be aware of their confinement at the time.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Using a legal document to assert authority unlawfully.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Unintentional confinement due to negligence.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Victims must be conscious of being confined to pursue a legal claim.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>IIED = Intentionally inflicting emotional distress on another Defense of Property = Using force to protect personal property from harm Self-Defense = Using reasonable force to protect oneself from harm Recapture of Property = Using force to reclaim property that was taken</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Hull v Scruggs = Court ruled that reasonable efforts were exhausted and no liability for killing the dog Katko v Briney = Court ruled that deadly force cannot be used for property defense Wright v Haffke = Court allowed the use of deadly force against an armed robbery Bethlehem Steel Corp = Court ruled that a claim of emotional distress was not sufficient for IIED</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Close relationship to the victim = Must be closely related to the victim Present at the scene = Must be present when the event occurs Awareness of injury = Must be aware that the event causes injury Emotional distress = Must suffer emotional distress as a result</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Non-deadly force = Force that does not have the capacity to cause death or serious injury Reasonable force = Proportionate force that is necessary to protect against intrusion Deadly force = Force that may cause death or serious harm Mistake destroys privilege = A misunderstanding negates the justification for using force</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Self-Defense = Privilege to use reasonable force against an unprivileged act Defense of Property = Privilege to use reasonable force to protect property Defense of Others = Privilege to use force to protect another person Mistake = Condition that can negate the privilege of defense</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Edwards v Lee = Rights of landowners extend above and below the land Smith v New England = Trespass need only interfere with the use of space Desnick v. = Consent obtained by fraud is a defense to trespass RoT 166 = Unintentional entry does not subject actor to liability</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Accidental Intrusion = Non-negligent entry causing harm Abnormally Dangerous Activity = Conduct leading to liability regardless of intent Consent = Defense can be invalidated if actions exceed scope Unequivocal Consent = Consent cannot be obtained by mistake or deception</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Consent by Fraud = Valid only if actions stay within agreed limits Trespass = Interference with the possession or use of land Unintentional Entry = Liability excluded if the entry was non-negligent Possessor's Rights = Owner has rights to the benefit of the use of space</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Intentional Trespass = Liability for knowingly entering another's land Negligent Entry = Liability for failing to foresee potential harm Strict Liability = Liability without intent, associated with dangerous activities Defensive Trespass = A legal ground to justify entering another's property</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Stringing lights = Interference with use of airspace Driving fast and losing control = Abnormally dangerous activity Walking and tripping over a dog = Accidental intrusion without liability Flying low over property = Interference with reasonable use of land and airspace</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Attractive Nuisance = Liability for injuries to children unable to appreciate risks. Beaten Path Rule = Knowing trespassers require reasonable care in activities. Artificial Conditions = Duty of care for dangerous conditions known to trespassers. Possessor's Duty = Not liable for physical harm unless reasonable care is exercised.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>RST 334 = Liability for failing to carry on activities with care for trespassers. RST 333 = Lack of liability for ordinary conditions affecting trespassers. RST 337 = Liability for known dangers posed by artificial conditions. RST 333(b) = Failure in activities leading to potential harm to trespassers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Failure to Warn = Liability for not informing about a dangerous condition. Knowledge of Trespassers = Increased duty of care for frequently trespassing individuals. Reasonable Care Standard = Expectation to avoid engaging in hazardous activities carelessly. Clear Condition Responsibility = Possessor's responsibility for ensuring safety where known dangers exist.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Landowner's Duty to Trespassers = Not generally liable unless conditions are hazardous. Duties to Known Trespassers = Specific responsibilities toward individuals known to trespass. Activities Imposing Risk = Liability for dangerous activities conducted without caution. Condition of Safety = Expectation to prepare land for use by trespassers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Liability for Hazardous Objects = Responsibility to prevent attraction of children. Constructive Knowledge = Liability based on known frequent trespassers. Reasonable Safety Measures = Expectation of care in maintaining land conditions. Judgment of Risk = Determination of whether conditions pose unreasonable harm.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Apparent Consent = Consent inferred from a person's words or conduct Implied Consent = Permission presumed in emergencies when consent cannot be acquired Consent to Combat = Agreement to engage in physical altercations in specified contexts Fraud-Based Consent = Consent obtained through deception regarding the circumstances</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Werth v Taylor = Implied consent in medical emergencies Hart v Geysel = Consent barring recovery in illegal fights Broska v Olson = Consent validity despite unreasonable fears Restatement on Consent = Legal considerations of consent in torts</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Counterfeit money for transfusion = Considered battery due to deception Counterfeit money for sex = Not considered battery under consent Unwanted kiss received without objection = Inferred to have consented based on actions Emergency medical procedure against religious views = Implied consent justified by emergency circumstances</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Implied in Law = Legally presumed consent in specific situations Implied in Fact = Consent suggested by the behavior of the individuals Consent Exists = Defense against claims of battery Consent to Invasion of Privacy = Waives the right to recover damages for privacy breaches</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Apparent Consent = Silence in response to a healing touch Implied Consent = Playing dodgeball with friends Consent to Combat = Agreeing to participate in a boxing match Fraud-Based Consent = Agreeing to a medical procedure based on misrepresentation</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Hart v Geysel = Engaging in an illegal fight narrows recovery rights Werth v Taylor = Emergency situations allow for inferred medical consent Broska v Olson = Ruling against recovery based on unsubstantiated fears Restatement on Battery = Differentiation of battery based on consent scenarios</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Apparent Consent = Silent agreement inferred through actions Implied Consent = Assumed permission in unavoidable conditions Informed Consent = Using knowledge to agree to potential risks Non-Consent = Legal grounds for pursuing battery claims</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Consent Implied in Law = Accepted in emergencies without prior agreement Consent Implied in Fact = Assumed from behavior suggesting agreement Consent to Injury in Sports = Right to engage in competitive physical activities Relevance of Fraud = Validity of consent challenged by dishonesty</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Keel v Hainline = Liability for battery due to indirect involvement in contact Manning v Grimsley = Transfer of liability for actions leading to unintended contact Morgan v Loyacoma = Seizure of an item as battery Fisher v Carrousel Motor Hotel = Grasping an object intimately connected to a person constitutes battery</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Direct Contact = Physical connection between bodies Contact with closely attached objects = Involves grabbing or interfering with items near the person Offensive contact = Involves interactions that invoke offensive feelings Liability for light touch = Touch does not need to be felt to constitute battery</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Accidental contact from a thrown object = Transfer of intent Smoke causing offense = Indirect contact Snatching away a plate = Battery via closely held object A light touch not felt = Touch established as battery</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Leichtman v WLW J Comm = Tobacco smoke can be harmful contact Vosburg v Putney = Contact not felt can still be actionable Fisher v Carrousel Motor Hotel = Grasping items absolutely connected to a person Morgan v Loyacoma = Seizure of personal property qualifies as battery</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Transfer of Liability = Responsibility passed from one party to another Intentional conduct = Deliberate actions leading to harmful outcomes Proximate cause = Direct link between the defendant's actions and the plaintiff's harm Unlawful manner = Conduct executed against a person's rights</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Direct Person-to-Person Contact = Immediate bodily interaction Contact with Attached Objects = Interference with belongings held closely Offensive Contact = Contact that can lead to feelings of offense Indirect Contact = Non-physical interactions recognized by law</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Keel v Hainline = Liability established despite indirect contact Manning v Grimsley = Intent found even when target was missed Vosburg v Putney = Established that touch can be recognized without feeling Leichtman v WLW J Comm = Emergence of new definitions of contact offense</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Liability for Snatching = Morgan v Loyacoma Tobacco Smoke as Offensive = Leichtman v WLW J Comm Transfer via Unwanted Contact = Manning v Grimsley Indirect Touch Leading to Liability = Vosburg v Putney</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Common carrier = Passengers Innkeeper = Guests Employer = Employees School = Students</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Statutorily imposed duty = Legal obligation mandated by law Negligent entrustment = Providing a potentially dangerous item to an unfit person Therapist-patient duty = Obligation to warn identifiable victims Parent-dependent duty = Responsibility for minor child welfare</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Custodian-ward = Superior ability to protect Employer-employee = Facilitation of tortious act Landlord-tenant = Duty of care for leased premises Parent-child = Specific dangerous habit</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Assumed duty = Requires acceptance of responsibility Acted recklessly = Potential contributory negligence Comparative negligence = Jury allocation of fault Imminent danger = Duty not to abandon rescue</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Rescue Doctrine = Cannot be charged unless duty assumed Commercial vendors = Duties while serving alcohol Custodian relationship = Duty of care in supervising custody Special relationships = Imposed duties by law</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Imminent danger = Duty towards victims in peril Negligent entrustment = Liability for allowing dangerous use Alcohol vendors = Responsibilities for served customers Therapist obligations = Duty to inform at-risk individuals</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Employer = Duty to ensure worker safety Landlord = Duty towards tenants' safety Therapist = Duty to protect identifiable victims Parent = Duty to raise and safeguard children</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Duty to Rescue = No liability if rescuer assumes duty Common carrier duty = Extra duty of care to passengers Therapist duty = Notify at-risk persons of threats Commercial vendors' duty = Care towards patrons consuming on-premises</p> Signup and view all the answers