Intention to keep persons personal property intent Related to larceny one is

Intention to keep persons personal property intent

  • Test Prep
  • kellmargs2
  • 43
  • 100% (2) 2 out of 2 people found this document helpful

This preview shows page 6 - 8 out of 43 pages.

2. Intention to keep person’s personal property (intent) Related to larceny, one is crime one is tort Defenses Borrowing and bringing it back (unless sold) Consent- had permission to borrow it Nuisance 1. Intangible intrusion (music, smells)- D disrupts P on P’s personal property P cannot enjoy themself (injury) If D was there first, P cannot sue 2. Intruding in personal space (intent) (conduct) Has to be consistent Defenses P moved to nuisance, nuisance was present first Sometimes not for money (injunctions) EMPLOYER LIABILITY If employee misbehaves within scope of their job, employer is liable Scope of employment - if employee is doing their job description and commit tort, employer is responsible for employee (pizza guy texting)
Image of page 6
Joint & Several Liability Multiple defendants, all fully liable, separately liable as individuals and jointly as a group Occurs with suits that employee was responsible, and company is liable for the employee Each D may be held responsible for the entire loss caused to the P Can get money from any of the Ds, primarily concerned with P getting $ If one D is 50% or more responsible, they are fully liable Proportionate share liability if less than 50% Contribution - if any D pays more than fair share they can sue the other Ds NEGLIGENCE- An accidental cause of action causing an injury 1. Duty 2. Breach 3. Proximate Cause 4. Injury Duty - general rule- we each owe a duty to every person who we can reasonably foresee might become injured by our carelessness Reasonable Foreseeability : Anyone that is reasonably foreseeable, the victim can sue for negligence Factors to determine duty Foreseeability of harm to the plaintiff Degree of certainty that P suffered an injury Closeness of the connection between D’s conduct and the injury suffered Moral blame attached to D’s conduct Policy of preventing future harm The extent of the burden to the defendant and consequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care with resulting liability The availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved Different levels of duty Business owners have higher duty to employees and customers Customer has been “invited” into business Duty of Landowners Invitees - people invited onto land, can sue for for negligence under ordinary rules- higher duty to them Licensees - people who go onto property to sell something or drop of an invitation, can sue for hidden dangers and intentional torts- lower duty Trespasser - person enters land with no right to do so, can only sue for intentional torts- almost no duty Breach - when D fails to exercise same care as a “reasonable person” When someone is injured due to carelessness = breach Court considerations All circumstances of the case High crime area > landlords put extra locks on doors Customs of others in the community or companies in the industry
Image of page 7
Image of page 8

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 43 pages?

  • Spring '08
  • Baker

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture