Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Torts (Intentional (False Imprisonment (Reasonable amount of time…
Torts
Intentional
-
-
-
IIED
-
Purp, sub cert and recklessness
Voluntary Act, Purpose/ sub cert to cause offensive/ harmful contact. Cause in Fact, Damage
Negligence
Duty
Reasonable person std
Mentally ill
sudden onset--> no, prior knowledge and didn't take steps --> yes
-
-
Homeowner
Restatment: everyone has duty of reasonable care except to flagrant trespassers (just avoid willfull and wanton)
-
-
-
-
Medical (Bradford)
-
Duty to disclose when physician has personal motives ($, fame, etc..)
-
-
Breach
B < PL
part of Duty and Breach, look at burden to fix vs possibility x actual dmg
circumstance
look at skills and knowledge above ordinary member of class (careful not part of std) 3rd restatment
Evidence
Slip and Fall cases
look for "banana peel grittiness" aka length of time the object was there, opportunity for employees to pick up/see (constructive notice), and foreseeability that it would cause harm (unreasonable risk)
-
Intervening Cause?
Cuts off liability
-
-
-
Unforseen consequences
children? depends on type of act, if natural probable result then no intervening (Woodhouse)
-
-
-
Strict Liability
products
-
warning defect
-
this is not RES ISPA, P still has a burden of proof
-
-
-
-
Absolute Liability
inherent danger, dont look at facts behind P's conduct just if they did it
-
-
-
-
Once courts determine prox, D is liable for:
-
-
-
Attractive nuisance
-
-
factors: visibility from road, attempt to warn against (signs, fence, etc)
NIED
-
perception of events
need to see, hear (maybe smell?) events
-
-
-
Comparative Negligence
pure
subtract P's part, D's damages are apportioned by %
modified
if P is liable for over 50% between any Cause of Action, that D is removed and totally liability is readjusted
Contributory Negligence
if P is partially neg (breach of common duty) , its BARS recovery
-
-
-
-
-
Vicarious Liability
Respondet Superior
Employee while within the scope of employment does something negligent (also intentional ie bounty hunters. bleeds with neg per se due to permits)
-
ultimately about control (evidence like training, delegation, or hiring= employee
-
might be liable for slight deviations from scope of employment (driver deviates a few miles for food) depends on foreseeability
-
While there is no duty in these cases, look for things like fences
-
-
Wilbanks isn't liable for a rando banana peel in Hannafords. However if Wilbanks drops a banana peel, she has a duty to warn
-
This is still based on obj std, courts tossed sub and modified
Factors: is statute too obscure/ impose liability without fault, Disproportionate damages, Direct vs Indirect violation, emergency, attempted compliance
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Here, unlike Concert or Industry-wide, don't have to show inducement or control just that they opperate in same market
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
state of the art knowledge/ contemporaneous knowledge is important, businesses aren't insurers
-
-
-
Affirmative Defense: have to show plaintiff's neg is greater than D's and unable to recover under modified
-