T 1 - Intentional Torts
About this set
Created by:
paulggalindo Plus on May 24, 2010
Subjects:
Log in to favorite or report as inappropriate.
Order by
30 terms
Terms | Definitions |
|---|---|
 How is Extreme Sensitivity treated? | Extreme sensitivity is ignored in determining whether a π has a cause of action |
| Does a ∆ need legal capacity to commit an intentional tort? | No, a ∆ does not need legal capacity to commit an intentional tort. Although legal capacity is required to consent to a intentional tort, thus waiving the right to sue, it is not a requisite to committing one. Thus, children, drunks, and persons with developmental capabilities are all capable of committing intentional torts even though they lack legal capacity to engage in other acts. |
| What element is ALWAYS required in order to prove an intentional tort? | The π must always prove that a ∆ had INTENT to commit an intentional tort. Intent an element of every intentional tort. |
| When does a ∆ have the INTENT necessary to commit an intentional tort? | When ∆ has a DESIRE, WANT, or WISH to produce produce the legally forbidden act. This requires that the ∆ commit a VOLUNTARY ACT with the desire, want, or wish to produce an intentional tort. |
| BATTERY—Elements | 1. The ∆ must commit a harmful or OFFENSIVE contact, 2. The contact must be with the π's PERSON, and 3. ∆'s INTENT |
| BATTERY—Offensive Contact? | Offensive=Unpermitted. Focus on ORDINARY sensitivity. |
| BATTERY—contact with π's PERSON? | Things connected/touching π. Examples—purses, brief cases, scarves, horses (if riding) |
| BATTERY—Timing? | Harmful or Offensive contact need not occur at the same time as ∆'s voluntary act |
| BATTERY—∆ Commits? | ∆ Need not commit battery with his/her own person. Extensions of ∆'s person (e.g., time-bombs, poison) also qualify |
| ASSAULT—Elements? | 1. π put in reasonable APPREHENSION 2. of IMMEDIATE battery 3. ∆'s INTENT |
| ASSAULT—Immediate battery? | Must have MENACING gestures--words alone lack immediacy. BUT, words can NEGATE menacing gestures (e.g., conditional words ("if you weren't my friend, I'd hit you") |
| ASSAULT—Apprehension? | Apprehension = Belief of immediate battery. Apprehension ≠ Fear. Beware: David-and-Goliath, Unloaded Gun Problems. |
| ASSAULT—David-and-Goliath Problem | Apprehension ≠ Fear. Even a diminutive person can assault a larger person, if the latter has a reasonable apprehension that he/she will be presently battered |
| ASSAULT—Unloaded Gun Problem | Focus on π's knowledge (beliefs). Would the π know or have reason to believe that a gun is loaded—i.e., that ∆ is CAPABLE of an immediate battery. |
| FALSE IMPRISONMENT—Elements? | 1. ∆ commits act of RESTRAINT that 2. Confines π to a BOUNDED area |
| FALSE IMPRISONMENT—act of RESTRAINT? | Threat Omission (of pre-existing duty) π knows about restraint or is harmed by it |
| FALSE IMPRISONMENT—BOUNDED area? | NOT bounded IF (1) reasonable means of escape, (2) that π can reasonably discover. Note: Reasonable ≠ dangerous, disgusting, humiliating, hidden |
| INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (IIED)—Elements? | 1. OUTRAGEOUS conduct 2. π must suffer from SEVERE distress |
| IIED—Outrageous? | "Conduct that exceeds all bounds of decency tolerated in a civilized society." But, mere INSULTS without more ≠ outrageous or actionable |
| IIED—Outrageous? (factors) | a. Conduct is continuous or repetitive b. ∆ is a common-carrier or inn-keeper (duty of courtesy) c. π is a member of a fragile class of persons (e.g., children, elderly, pregnant women) |
| IIED—SEVERE distress? | Mildly annoyed/irritated/chagrined ≠ severe No particular showing required (not necessary to show medical evidence/treatment, or physical manifestations/impact) |
| IIED—Intent? | Strangely, actual intent is not a strict requirement—reckless conduct is sufficient |
| TRESPASS TO LAND—Elements? | 1. ∆ commits act of PHYSICAL INVASION 2. π is in POSSESSION of the land |
| TRESPASS TO LAND—Invasion? | Focus: Did ∆ want/intend to cross the boundary of π's land through a voluntary act? |
| TRESPASS TO LAND—PHYSICAL invasion? | Yes—Tangible objects No—Intangible (e.g., light, smoke, noise) |
| TRESPASS TO LAND—Possessor? | Focus is on POSSESSION, not ownership |
| TRESPASS TO CHATTELS—Defined? | MODEST interference with personal property, e.g., small but deliberate damage, keying a car |
| CONVERSION—Defined? | SIGNIFICANT interference with personal property, e.g., theft, demolition of a car |
| CONVERSION—Remedy? | "Forced Sale." π can recover the FULL MARKET VALUE of the chattel—not just its rental or repair value. NB: NY Distinction—A bona fide purchaser for value can't be a converter. |
| Strict Liability : Elements | 1) Absolute duty to make safe 2) Breach of absolute duty 3) Actual and proximate causation 4) Damages |
First Time Here?
Welcome to Quizlet, a fun, free place to study. Try these flashcards, find others to study, or make your own.