Burns Philp Food Inc v Cavalea Contl Freight Inc p814 intent to invade space

Burns philp food inc v cavalea contl freight inc p814

This preview shows page 81 - 83 out of 101 pages.

Burns Philp Food, Inc. v. Cavalea Cont’l Freight, Inc. (p.814) – intent to invade space Rule: Trespass as a strict liability offense. Cavalea did not consent to the construction of a fence on its property by BPF. T. Ct. = Cavalea may remove the fence, but no damages Appellate Division= Cavalea entitled to damages o Not possible for Cavalea to have consented to the building of the fence on their property *While the act must have been intentionally undertaken, there need not be any intention to do harm to the plaintiff or to invade property that the actor knows to be owned or possessed by someone else, just as there need not be any unreasonable conduct. Nonharmful trespasses do not generate a significant compensatory award but might generate substantial punitive Kopka v. Bell Tel. Co. (p.820) – liable for all personal injuries – proximate and indirect Contractor dug holes for Bell without permission, Kopka injured foot. Rule: Recover from both because Bell authorized it. Bell Tel. hired independent contractor to dig holes; Kopka finds out about the holes, goes to find out about it and injures his foot 81
Image of page 81
P’s initial action was in negligence – court rejected this claim, stated that P could only recover for Ds invasion of Ps land Issue of proximate cause – is the hole dug by the third party D the proximate cause of the injury? Rule : the intention which is required to make the actor liable is an intention to enter upon the particular piece of land in question irrespective of whether the actor knows or should know that he is not entitled to enter (restatement) o Second Rule : one who authorizes or directs another to commit an act which consitutes a trespass to another’s land is himself liable as a trespasser to the same extent as if the trespass were committed directly by himself, and this is true even though the authority or direction be given to one who is an independent contractor – vicarious liability o Trespasser is liable not only for personal injuries resulting directly and proximately from the trespass but also for those which are indirect and consequential o If the owner or possessor of land, willfully, voluntarily, or by negligence, himself brings about the injury to his person, such an injury cant be said to be consequent upon the trespass to the land, and in that event the trespasser would not be liable o Authorization doctrine : gets rid of respondent superior; one who authorizes or directs another on to someone’s land, which constitutes a trespass to another’s land makes him a trespasser as though it were committed by himself ***SPACE DELETED*** Defense to Trespass: NECESSITY You are permitted in intentionally trespassing when circumstances create conditions that allow a person to interfere with another’s interest to aid themselves/maintain your own o Does not give P the right to the property, just the right to enter Limitation: IF YOU ARE WRONG, YOU ARE LIABLE Privilege to trespass, NOT to consume.
Image of page 82
Image of page 83

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture