Torts (intentional torts (requires a voluntary act, intent, the elements…
intentional torts (requires a voluntary act, intent, the elements under that tort, causation, harm, and lack of privilege or defense)
desires his act to cause the harmful result.
reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact. (apparent, harmful or offensive, overt act, no damages needed)
harmful or offensive contact with the victim or something closely connected with the victim (words can suffice)
intentional act that causes a plaintiff to be confined or restrained to a bounded area against plaintiff's will and the plaintiff knows of the confinement or is injured.
intentional infliction of emotional distress
intentional or reckless act amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct that causes the plaintiff severe mental distress.
defense of others
defense of property
trespass to land
intentional, physical invasion of property.
trespass to chattels (tangible personal property)
intentional act that interferes with the plaintiff's chattel, causing harm.
intentional act that causes the destruction or serious interference with the plaintiff's chattel.
economic harm and dignitary torts
a defamatory message of or concerning the plaintiff that is communicated to a 3rd person and damages the plaintiff's reputation
intentional assertion of a material false fact that a plaintiff justifiably relied on and that causes damages to the plaintiff.
unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public (interference with public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience)
activity or think that substantially and unreasonably interferes with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of the land (must be substantial interference, offensive, inconvenent, or annoying to an average person in the comunity).
invasion of privacy (consent and privilege defenses apply)
4 separate torts:
appropriation of P's name or picture (unauthorized use of the plaintiff's id or likeness for the defendant's commercial advantage)
intrusion on the plaintiff's affairs/seclusion (D unreasonably intrudes into the plaintiff's seclusion)
publication of facts placing plaintiff in a false light (defendant publishes matters that portray a plaintiff in a false light)- reasonable person standard
public disclosure of private facts about the plaintiff (defendant unreasonably discloses private facts about a plaintiff to the public)
strict liability (requires a showing that the nature of the D's activity imposes an absolute duty to make safe; the dangerous aspect of the activity is the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury; and the plaintiff suffered damages)
liability for animals
injury by wild animal
owner is strictly liable for damages when his animal trespasses, if it is reasonably foreseeable.
generally arises by statute + defendant on owner's knowledge
abnormally dangerous activity
must create a foreseeable risk of serious harm even with the exercise of reasonable care, and must be an activity that is not a matter of common usage.
requires defect, (manufacturing defect, design defect, warning defect), control, unchanged, D must be a business, causation, and damages
duty exists if: action is taken; or owe an affirmative duty to act (innkeepers, common carriers, professionals, parents),
standard of care (reasonable, ordinary, prudent person). objective standard. Standard higher if professional.
Negligence per se (breach by statute)
1) the statute carried a criminal penalty; 2) the standard is clearly defined in the statute; 3) the plaintiff is within the class of people the statute was designed to protect; and 4) the harm is the type the statute was intended to prevent.
res ipsa loquitur (when the plaintiff does not know the circumstances needed to establish a breach of duty.)
Harm normally would not happen absent negilgence.
Harm was caused by an instrumentality solely in defendant’s control.
Plaintiff did not contribute to the negligence.
cause in fact
substantial factor (This is used when there are two independent and sufficient causes and either alone could have caused the harm. So, neither is a but for cause.)
burden shifting test (burden shifts to the multiple defendants to prove it wasn't them)
foreseeable risk (exception of eggshell plaintiff)
direct cause (if uninterrupted chain of events between D's negligent act)
indirect cause (when something breaks the chain of causation)
does not cut of liability (subsequent medical malpractice, negligence of rescuers, and subsequent accidents)
assumption of risk
assumption of risk