Cornell Law - Torts Outline (Zimmerman, Fall 2004)

Cornell Law - Torts Outline (Zimmerman, Fall 2004) - TORTS...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
TORTS OUTLINE Zimmerman, Fall 2004 T ABLE OF C ONTENTS S ECTION 1: I NTENTIONAL T ORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 B ATTERY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 P OSSIBLE D EFENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 T RESPASS TO L AND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 P OSSIBLE D EFENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 T RESPASS TO C HATTEL . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 C ONVERSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 A SSAULT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 E MOTIONAL IGNITARY H ARMS . . . 5 S ECTION 2: N EGLIGENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 H ISTORIC F OUNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 D ETERMINING N EGLIGENCE . . . . . . . . . . 8 R ES I PSA L OQUITUR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 S TATUTES AND R EGULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 D’ S A FFIRMATIVE D UTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 D EFENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 T HE C ALCULUS OF R ISK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 N EGLIGENCE T HEORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 S ECTION 4: P RODUCTS L IABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 D EVELOPMENT OF PL T HEORY . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 M ODERN P RODUCTS L IABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 D EFENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 S ECTION 5: M ISREPRESENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 I NTENTIONAL M ISREPRESENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 N EGLIGENT M ISREPRESENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Notes on Taking the Exam 1. Type structure outline right away, so if time expires, Prof can see where the answer was heading 2. Bullet-point to save words 3. Structure of the Answer a. Intro PP: P vs. D1 (identify claim), D2 (identify claim), and D3 (identify claim). State the elements of the relevant torts, how the fact pattern situation satisfies/doesn’t satisfy the elements, and, if possible, parenthetically cite a relevant case or section of the Restatement. b. Second PP: cross-claims Ds have c. Third PP: defenses and counterclaims D1 has against P, and strength of the defense d. Fourth PP: defenses and counterclaims D2 has against P, and strength of the defense e. Fifth PP: defenses and counterclaims D3 has against P, and strength of the defense f. Sixth PP: summary 1 of 25
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
S ECTION 1: I NTENTIONAL T ORTS (Restatement describes intentionally causing harm as bringing about harm if the person desires to bring about harm – purpose – or engages in an action knowing that harm is substantially certain to occur – knowledge.) I. Battery (touching another without consent) a. Intent to harm is not necessary so long as D intended to touch. i. Vosburg v. Putney 50 NW 403 (WI 1891) (p. 4): (D liable when he purposefully touched another on the leg without intending to harm, although serious harm did result.) ii. Garratt v. Dailey 279 P.2d 1091 (WA 1955) (p. 7): (D held liable when he intentionally moved a chair a woman was going to sit on, causing her to fall.) Court said that since boy knew she was sitting down, moving the chair was unlawful, even if no intent to harm. iii.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 25

Cornell Law - Torts Outline (Zimmerman, Fall 2004) - TORTS...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online