TABLE OF CONTENTS Intentional Torts: Battery 1 Assault 1 False Imprisonment 2 IIED 2 Defenses: Consent 3-5 Insanity 5-6 Self-Defense 6 Defense of Property 6-7 Necessity 7 Damages 8 Strict Liability: RPS 8-9 Negligence 9 Landowner Duty 10-11 Negligence: 3 Elements of Negligence 11 Exception to General Rule 12 Minor 12 Calculus of Risk: Risk 13-14 Hand’s Formula 14 Custom: Custom Not = Ordinary Care 14 Regular Custom 14-15 Statute & Regulations: Statute Breach 15-17 π’s Conduct: Contributory Negligence 18-19 Last Clear Chance 19-20 Assumption of Risk 20-21 Comparative Negligence 21-22 Causation: Cause-In-Fact 22-23 Loss of Chance of Survival 23-24 Multiple Sufficient Causes 24-25 Proximate Cause 25-28 Affirmative Duties & Obligations: Reasonable Care Duty 28-30 Products Liability: Manufacture Defect 31-33 Design Defect 33 Warning Defect 33-34 1
A. INTENTIONAL TORTS Doctrine of transferred intent : fact that the injury resulted to another doesn’t relieve defendant from responsibility (when desiring to hurt one person hurts another person) → can transfer across torts I. Tort of Battery Elements of Battery : (1) unlawful (2) intentional (3) touching If the intended act is unlawful, the intention to commit it must necessarily be unlawful Vosburg v. Putney: Putney slightly hits toe on Vosburg’s shin. π doesn’t feel anything at first but then eventually ended up suffering pain & having operation. Earlier, π suffered coasting injury to the same leg which was already in diseased state prior to ∆’s touching. - Intention is about the act, not the resulting harm (no mal intent) - Environment was unlawful because it was in class, after teacher said stop Trespass - Every unauthorized and therefore unlawful entry into the close of another is trespass Doughetry v. Stepp: Stepp unlawfully trespassed on Doughtery’s property because he believed it was his. - It was a good faith mistake (no mal intent), but he intended to be on the property, and because it wasn't his it was unlawful - Nominal damages because no physical harm but still unlawful ($1 Taylor Swift) If no intent, need knowledge of substantial certainty that an act/result will happen = battery (intending outcome) Garratt v. Dailey : Dailey, 5 yrs. old, pulled chair out from Mrs. Garratt. She fell and fractured her hip. Dailey was liable for battery because he had knowledge without a substantial certainty that harm would result - Knowledge of substantial certainty: is a subjective standard because it’s if the defendant knows a certain outcome will occur o Ex : Fire a gun, don’t intend to shoot anyone, but do… liable for battery because know there is substantial certainty that harm would result An imposition to a person’s autonomy to constitute battery if act is intentional and unlawful Alcorn v. Mitchell: Mitchell spat in Alcorn’s face in a courtroom.
- Fall '08
- The Land, π