Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Torts - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Confinement includes confining by physical barriers, failing to release the plaintiff where the defendant has a legal duly to do so, or asserting invalid legal authority.
      - Other considerations: no time limit on amount of confinement; no duty to resist if D makes credible threat to use physical force; not confinement if there is a reasonable means of escape that P is actually aware of
      - Defense: shopkeeper's privilege requires detention that is: in a reasonable manner; for a reasonable period of time; based on a reasonable belief as to theft.
    - - Beyond the bounds of decency
  - - - Intentional entry is all that is required- don't need to intend to cause harm; mistake is not a defense; don't need to know they are trespassing; plaintiff must be in actual possession or have the right to immediate possession of that land (but not ownership); Satisfied if plaintiff causes a third person to enter onto plaintiff's land or remains upon the plaintiff's land when under a legal duty to leave; Plaintiff's land includes the area both above and below the surface; Liable for nominal damages and actual harm.
    - - Chattel- tangible personal property or intangible property that has a physical representation
      - Like trespass, mistake is not a defense; more serious interference might lead to conversation
- - - - An Individual cannot recover personally for public nuisance unless the individual suffers a harm of a kind different from that suffered by other members of the public
- - - - Actual (cause in fact)- but for the d's actions, the injury would not have occured. Can be more than one cause in fact- the d only needs to be a substantial factor in causing the p's damages for d to be liable
      - Legal (proximate cause)- d's are liable only for the foreseeable, normal incidents within the increased risk caused by their acts. Despite foreseeability being a necessary part of proximate cause, eggshell plaintiff rule stipulates that the d takes full responsibility of the p's injuries, even if they are more severe than they would have been to a normal person
        
        direct cause: when there is an uninterrupted chain of events between a d's negligent act and the p's injury
        
        Here, d is liable for all foreseeable harmful results
        
        indirect causes: An indirect cause case is one where a force came into motion after the defendant's act and combined with the negligent act to cause the plaintiff's injury. The intervening force may break the chain of causation between the initial act and the ultimate injury.
        
        Foreseeable intervening acts: foreseeable intervening acts do not cut off a defendant's liability, including subsequent medical malpractice, negligence of rescuers, and subsequent accidents. The key is again foreseeability.
        
        Unforeseeable intervening acts do cut off liability, which may include superseding causes may include a naturally occurring phenomena, criminal acts of third persons (unless foreseeable), intentional torts of third persons, or extraordinary forms of negligent conduct by the third person.
    - - negligence per se- when statute provides for a criminal penalty, then the statute's duty replaces the common law duty
      - res ipsa loquitur- the accident that caused the injury would not normally occur unless negligence occurred
    - - Assumption of the risk: that the plaintiff consented (express or implied) to the defendant's actions
      - Comparative fault: the p's conduct contributed to her injury and is compared to d's negligence and damages are reduced accordingly. NOTE: comparative fault does not apply to intentional torts.
    - - Possessors of land: invitee (duty to prevent injuries and duty to discover dangerous conditions); Licensee (duty to exercise reasonable care and to warn of dangerous conditions)