1 one can is privileged to commit an act which would

This preview shows page 9 - 11 out of 18 pages.

1.One can (is privileged to) commit an act which would otherwise bea trespass to the chattel of another or a conversion of it, if it is or is reasonably believed to be reasonable and necessary to protect the person or property of the actor, the other, or a third persion from serious harm, unless the actor knows that the person for whose benefit he acts is unwilling that he shall do so.2.Where the act is for the benefit of the actor or a third party, he is subject to liability for any harm caused by the exercise of the privilege.Public Necessity: provides defendants with an absolute privilege to interfere with the property of others to avoid a “public disaster.” oMore modern cases involving governmental actors focus less on the existence of the privilege and more on the question of whether the federal or state constitution requires the government to compensate the owner for loss of propertyoExample: things destroyed during a war.Chapter 13: Vicarious Liability~Tort liability is sometimes imposed not only on the actual tortfeasor, but also on others who have some connection with the underlying event; in these cases, boththe tortfeasor and the other party are liable.Victim can only recover once, but because the secondary party often has greater resources (AKA money), the victim may prefer to seek recovery from the secondarily liable party.There must be some type of “special relationship” between the tortfeasor andthe party held legally responsible.Vicarious liability is not dependent upon any notion of fault or wrongdoing by that party, but it is imputed for policy or practicality.oOften said to relate more closely to strict liability than either negligence or intentional tort liability because of this.1.Respondeat Superior Doctrine: An employer is liable for the tortious acts of his or her employees which are committed within the scope of employmentand which cause injuries or property damage to a third person.a.Scope of employment: acts so closely connected and reasonably incidental to what the servant was employed to do, that they may be regarded as methods, however improper, to carry out the employer’s objectives.9
Torts II JamisonSpring 2017i.Detour: permissible or slight deviations from an employee’s scope of employmentii.Frolic: unauthorized and substantial deviationiii.Intentional torts: generally not within the scope of employmentunless the scope of employment includes the potential use of force. 1.Example: If a waiter at a restaurant punches a patron, the owner of the restaurant would not be liable; but if a bouncer at a club punches someone, the owner will likely be liable.b.If a servant, without authority, hires an employee to perform or assist in his work, no liability can be imposed by respondeat superior (but the master may be liable by imputed negligenceif the servant negligently entrusts performance of his work to a third person)i.Example: A servant lets his intoxicated friend drive his

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture