Torts I

How is 'Specific Intent' defined in the common law of torts?

An actor intends the consequences of his conduct if his purpose is to bring about those consequences.

What constitutes 'General Intent' regarding an actor's conduct?

The actor knows with substantial certainty that the consequences will result from their conduct.

According to Garratt v. Dailey, what must a five-year-old defendant know to establish intent for battery when pulling a chair out?

That the plaintiff was trying to sit and would hit the ground with substantial certainty.

Which five torts allow for the application of 'Transferred Intent'?

Assault, Battery, False Imprisonment, Trespass to Land, and Trespass to Chattels.

What is the legal definition of 'Battery'?

When a defendant acts with substantial certainty that a harmful or offensive contact will occur and that contact is completed.

What are the four prima facie elements of Battery?

Intent, an act of harmful or offensive contact, contact to the plaintiff’s person, and causation.

What qualifies contact as 'Harmful' in a battery claim?

Contact that causes actual injury, pain, or disfigurement.

What is the 'Reasonable Person' test for 'Offensive Contact'?

Contact is offensive if an average or reasonable individual would find the contact offensive.

Under what condition is contact deemed 'offensive' even if a reasonable person would consider it acceptable?

If the defendant knows about the plaintiff's specific sensitivity to that contact.

In the context of Battery, what does 'Plaintiff’s Person' include besides the physical body?

Anything intimately connected with the plaintiff, such as clothing, a purse, or something being held.

Why did the court in Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel Inc. hold that snatching a plate constituted battery?

Because the plate was intimately connected to the plaintiff's body.

Contrast 'Direct' contact with 'Indirect' contact in a battery claim.

Direct contact involves striking the plaintiff, while indirect contact involves setting a trap for the plaintiff to fall into.

What is the legal definition of 'Assault'?

An intentional act that places someone in reasonable fear of imminent harmful or offensive contact.

What are the four prima facie elements of Assault?

Intent, an act creating reasonable apprehension, imminent harmful or offensive contact to the person, and causation.

To establish 'Apprehension' in an assault claim, what awareness must the plaintiff have?

The plaintiff must be aware of the threat from the defendant's act, though not necessarily the defendant's identity.

How does 'Apprehension' differ from 'Fear' or 'Intimidation' in the context of Assault?

Apprehension is the belief that one is about to be touched or harmed, judged by a reasonable person test rather than the plaintiff's bravery.

What is the 'Imminence' requirement for a victim's apprehension in an assault case?

The victim must reasonably believe they are about to become the victim of an immediate battery in that moment.

What type of 'Ability' must an aggressor have to be liable for assault?

The aggressor must have the present or apparent ability to carry out the harm.

What are the two key elements of 'False Imprisonment'?

The restraint of an individual against their will and the unlawfulness of such restraint.

According to Restatement (Second) of Torts § 42, when is there NO liability for intentionally confining another?

When the person physically restrained neither knows of the confinement nor is harmed by it.

In False Imprisonment, under what circumstance is an area NOT considered 'bounded'?

If there is a reasonable means of escape that the plaintiff is aware of.

When does a claim for 'False Arrest' typically fail against an officer?

When the officer has a valid warrant or probable cause to believe the person committed an offense.

What outcome serves as a complete defense to a subsequent claim of false arrest?

The conviction of the crime for which the person was specifically arrested.

Under what circumstance is Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) generally used in a legal strategy?

As a fallback tort to tack onto other claims when other intentional torts might allow recovery.

What are the four prima facie elements of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)?

Intentional or reckless conduct, extreme and outrageous conduct, a causal connection, and severe emotional distress.

How is 'Extreme and Outrageous' conduct defined for an IIED claim?

Behavior so intolerable that it goes beyond any reasonable idea of appropriate conduct or decency.

What are three factors that can make conduct 'Outrageous' that is not normally considered so?

Continuous nature, direction toward vulnerable plaintiffs, or commission by common carriers or innkeepers.

How does the intent requirement for IIED differ from other intentional torts?

Recklessness as to the effect of the defendant's conduct is sufficient to satisfy the intent requirement for IIED.

What is unique about the damage requirement for IIED compared to other intentional torts to the person?

IIED is the only intentional tort to the person that requires proof of actual severe emotional distress (damages).

Is transferred intent available for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)?

Transferred intent is normally not available to prove IIED.

What are the two prima facie elements of 'Trespass to Land'?

An act of physical invasion and the involvement of land.

What specific intent is required for a Trespass to Land claim?

Only the intent to move; the defendant does not need to know they crossed a property line.

What qualifies as 'Land' in a trespass claim regarding vertical space?

The airspace, surface, and sub-space below where the landowner could make reasonable use of the space.

What distinguishes 'Trespass to Chattels' from 'Conversion'?

Trespass to Chattels involves some damage to property, whereas Conversion involves serious interference or lots of damage.

Identify two categories of individuals who are legally deemed incapable of giving valid consent.

Drunk people and young children.

List three scenarios that invalidate an otherwise expressed consent.

Coercion, fraud, or mistake.

What is 'Presumed' or 'Implied' consent based upon?

Custom and usage or the specific conduct of the plaintiff.

What is the general standard for justifying 'Self-Defense'?

A person must use reasonable force to prevent what she reasonably believes to be an imminent threat of force against her.

Self-defense requires belief that is both _____ and _____.

Subjective and objective.

When is the use of 'Deadly Force' considered reasonable in self-defense?

When the actor believes she is being faced with deadly force herself.

What are the core components of the 'Negligence' cause of action?

Duty, breach of duty, causation in fact, proximate cause, and damages.

What does 'Negligence Per Se' refer to in a legal context?

The violation of a statute that triggers a standard of care and establishes a breach of duty.

The 'But-For' test in negligence is also known by the Latin phrase _____.

Sine qua non

What is 'Res Ipsa Loquitur' in the context of proving negligence?

A doctrine used to infer negligence when the accident is of a type that normally does not occur without it.

Distinguish 'Causation in Fact' from 'Proximate Cause'.

Causation in fact uses the but-for test, while proximate cause addresses the scope of liability and foreseeability.

Under the 'Risk Rule' for Proximate Cause, what is the primary limitation on liability?

Liability is limited by the foreseeability of the risk and the proportionality of the harm.

Name the three common categories used to determine the duty of care for 'Owners and Occupiers of Land'.

Trespassers, Licensees, and Invitees.

In terms of the 'Plaintiff's Person' in battery, how does Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel contrast with a direct strike?

Fisher established that indirect contact with objects held by the plaintiff is legally equivalent to a direct strike to the body.

How does the requirement for a 'Bounded Area' in False Imprisonment change if the plaintiff knows of an escape route?

The area is no longer considered bounded, and the defendant is not liable for false imprisonment.

How does the justification for 'Consent' differ from the justification for 'Self-Defense'?

Consent is a defense based on the plaintiff's permission, while Self-Defense is a defense based on the defendant's reasonable need to protect themselves.

In Assault, what is the 'Reasonable Person' test applied to?

The apprehension felt by the plaintiff regarding the imminence of harmful or offensive contact.

Why is 'Recklessness' sufficient for IIED but not for Battery or Assault?

IIED explicitly includes reckless disregard of likely distress as a qualifying level of intent, whereas Battery and Assault require specific or general intent.

According to the outline, what is the standard of care for a 'Professional' in negligence?

The professional is held to the standard of a reasonable person within their specific profession.

What is the 'Shopkeeper's Privilege' mentioned under 'Recovery of Property'?

A privilege allowing merchants to briefly detain individuals they reasonably suspect of shoplifting for investigation.

What are 'Intervening Causes' in the study of Proximate Cause?

Forces that come into play after the defendant's negligent act and contribute to the plaintiff's injury.

What constitutes a 'Special Relationship' that might create a 'Duty to Act'?

Relationships such as those between a common carrier and passenger, or a defendant and a third party they control.

In Trespass to Land, why is the 'intent to move' considered sufficient for liability?

Because the tort focuses on the physical invasion of property rather than the defendant's knowledge of legal boundaries.

What is 'Apparent Consent' based on?

The defendant's reasonable interpretation of the plaintiff's outward manifestations or conduct.

How does 'Aggravated Negligence' differ from 'Reasonable Care'?

It involves a higher degree of culpability, such as gross negligence, recklessness, or the failure to exercise utmost care.

What is the 'But-For' test (Sine Qua Non) for causation?

The injury would not have occurred 'but for' the defendant's conduct.