This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: [Note: Numbers in brackets refer to the printed pages of the Emanuel Law Outline where the topic is discussed.] Emanuel Law Outlines Torts Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION A. Definition of tort: There is no single definition of "tort." The most we can say is that: (1) a tort is a civil wrong committed by one person against another; and (2) torts can and usually do arise outside of any agreement between the parties.  B. Categories: There are three broad categories of torts, and there are individual named torts within each category: [2 - 4] 1. Intentional torts: First, intentional torts are ones where the defendant desires to bring about a particular result. The main intentional torts are: a. Battery. b. Assault. c. False imprisonment. d. Infliction of mental distress. 2. Negligence: The next category is the generic tort of "negligence . " Here, the defendant has not intended to bring about a certain result, but has merely behaved carelessly . There are no individually-named torts in this category, merely the general concept of "negligence."  3. Strict liability: Finally, there is the least culpable category, "strict liability . " Here, the defendant is held liable even though he did not intend to bring about the undesirable result, and even though he behaved with utmost carefulness. There are two main individually-named torts that apply strict liability: [3 - 4] a. Conducting of abnormally dangerous activities (e.g., blasting); and b. The selling of a defective product which causes personal injury or property damage. C. Significance of categories: There are two main consequences that turn on which of the three above categories a particular tort falls into:  1. Scope of liability: The three categories differ concerning D’s liability for far- reaching, unexpected, consequences . The more culpable D’s conduct, the more far- reaching his liability for unexpected consequences – so an intentional tortfeasor is liable for a wider range of unexpected consequences than is a negligent tortfeasor.  1 This text © 1994 Emanuel Publishing Corp. All rights reserved. Any user of any portion of this text (a "User") is hereby granted the right to view, print or download any portion of this text, so long as it is for the User's sole use. No part of this text may be sold or distributed by the User to any person in any form, through any medium (e.g., in print, on computer disc, via e-mail or the Internet) or by any means (e.g., electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise). 2. Damages: The measure of damages is generally broader for the more culpable categories. In particular, D is more likely to be required to pay punitive damages when he is an intentional tortfeasor than when he is negligent or strictly liable.  D. Exam approach: First, review the fact pattern to spot each individual tort that has, or may...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 04/11/2008 for the course LAW torts taught by Professor Idk during the Spring '08 term at University of Michigan.
- Spring '08