business law

Criminal state of mind (Mens rea)

a wrongful mental state or requisite intent must be proven

proved circumstantially (with direct evidence)

criminal intent without an overt act is not a crime

general intent

defendant intended to do the prohibited physical act

criminal battery-intended to hit the victim. need not show defendant intended harm

criminal intent without an overt act is not a crime

specific intent

some crimes require proof that the defendant intended to do something beyond the physical act

defendant intended to enter the building at night and commit a felony within (like stealing property)

recklessness or grossly negligent conduct

defendant grossly deviates from the standard of care a reasonable person would use

reckless driving

strict liability kinds of crimes

the prosecution only needs to prove the prohibited act was committed

it does not need to prove the defendants intent

this applies to many regulatory statutes that affect society’s health or safety

release of pollutants into the air

solicitation

one who counsels, incites, or induces another to commit an offense. the crime is complete upon act of counseling, inciting or inducing no matter what the response of the person solicited

conspiracy

an agreement between 2 or more persons to commit a crime

attempt

the specific intent to commit a crime and an act in furtherance of that intent

the act must go far enough towards completion of the crime

larceny

wrongful or fraudulent taking and carrying away another’s personal property with intent to permanently deprive the owner

taking or personal property with intent to steal it

force and fear are not involved

embezzlement

fraudulent conversion of another’s property by one in lawful possession of the property

intent to take after you take item

forgery

fraudulent making or altering of any writing in a way that changes legal rights and liabilities of another

robbery

forcefully taking personal property of any value from another with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession

larceny + force/intimidation

bribery

offering, giving or taking something of value, with corrupt intent, in order unlawfully to influence a person in any public or official capacity. crime complete when a bribe is offered

accepting a bribe is a separate offense

public officials (attempt to influence public official to serve private interest)

commercial (offer money for trade secrets)

foreign officials

murder

the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought

-fire degree murder: premeditated (intent to kill formed with some reflection, deliberation, reasoning, or weighing instead of on impulse)

manslaughter

voluntary manslaughter: a killing that would otherwise be murder but was committed in response to “adequate provocation” usually words alone are not enough!

involuntary manslaughter: an unintended killing that results from criminal negligence or caused during commission of an offense not amounting to a felony

McNaughten Rule

defendant suffered a serious identifiable mental illness and because of it defendant didn’t understand the nature of his act nor did not know it was wrong

irresistible impulse

defendant must convince a jury a mental defect left him unable to control his impulses

entrapment

the government induces the defendant to break the law. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime

necessity

defendant commits a criminal act in order to avoid a greater harm

imminent, no alternative, harm avoided greater than harm caused

duress

a wrongful threat

-a wrongful threat by a third person caused sally fear of imminent serious physical harm which caused her to perform an act she otherwise would not have done

self defense

deadly force: force likely to result in death or serious injury. deadly force can be used in self-defense if there is a reasonable belief in imminent death or serious injury

non-deadly force: force that reasonably appears necessary to prevent the imminent use of criminal force. generally a person can use that amount of non-deadly force that is necessary to protect self or property

crimes committed by a business

a corporation can be guilty of a crime. for punishment, the corporation is generally fined, but a corporation cannot be imprisoned

exclusionary rule

evidence obtained illegally may not be used at trial against the defendant. a motion to suppress excludes such evidence. such evidence cannot be used against the defendant at trial

tort

a civil wrong, not arising from a breach of contract (breach of contract=a violation of an agreement between the parties) or another agreement. In sum, a violation of civil law for which the law gives a remedy

tortfeasor

the wrongdoer; the person committing the tort. remember that the same act may be both a crime and a tort

3 basic groups of tortious harms

personal injury, property damage, invasion of other interests

intentional torts

harm caused by deliberate action

battery

non-consensual harmful or offensive touching. the tortfeasor intentionally did an act which resulted in harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff’s person or something closely associated with that person

assault

unprivileged act that causes apprehension of an imminent battery

assault=act (words alone are enough) + intent + apprehension (must be aware at the time) + apparent ability to commit

false imprisonment

unprivileged act intentionally restraining (confining for however short a time) the movement of another who is aware of such restraint

intentional infliction of emotional distress

extreme and outrageous conduct intended to cause severe emotional distress

intentional infliction of emotional distress=extreme and outrageous conduct + intent + cause + severe emotional distress

defamation

publication (communication) to a third party of a factual falsehood (false facts) which injures the plaintiff’s reputation

public figure or public official: if the plaintiff is a public figure or public official, the plaintiff must show that the defendant knew the statement was false at the time of publication-there was a reckless disregard of the truth

-reckless means that there were serious doubts

-public figure refers to someone with pervasive fame or notoriety

libel: defamation in written or other permanent form

slander: defamation in oral form, gestures or other non-permanent form

intrusion into private life

highly offensive intrusion (physical or otherwise) into private life, no expectation of privacy if windows open and looking in (blind open)

public disclosure of private facts

publication of highly offensive information, no public interest

-what is being said is true but is not public info

-not same as defamation because defamation is saying smth false

appropriation (use) of plaintiff’s name or likeness

unauthorized use of name or likeness for a commercial purpose

patent

grant by the federal government that permits the inventor exclusive use of an invention for a certain number of years. it gives the inventor the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling an invention

utility patent

for inventing a new or improved and useful process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter

design patent

for inventing a new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture

plant patent

for inventing or discovering and asexually reproducing any distinct and new variety of plant

trade dress

the distinctive and unique look, feel, or shape of a product or service like layout of an in-n-out

theft of a trade secret (something not disclosed to the public) for economic or other benefits is a tort or crime

tortious interference with contract

-a contract

-defendant knows of the contract

-defendant improperly induced third party to breach the contract

-damages are harm to the plaintiff

intentional interference with prospective economic advantage

interference with the right to pursue business without unjustifiable interference. inducing another not to enter a relationship with the plaintiff. the interference must be “wrongful”

negligence

act+ duty of due care + breach of duty of due care (lack of due care) + cause + damages

act

an act or actionable omission

duty of due care

tortfeasor owed the plaintiff a duty of care. whether a duty is imposed is determined by many factors. whether the harm is foreseeable is a key factor

reasonable person standard

each person owes a duty to behave as a reasonable person under same/similar circumstances

-standard: how would a reasonable person of ordinary prudence have acted? the jury decides if the conduct of the defendant fell below the reasonable person standard under same/similar circumstances

-proof of compliance with a custom/practice in an industry is some evidence of the standard

-violation of a statue

breach of duty

act of exposing others to an unreasonable risk of harm. the jury decides if the conduct of the defendant (the alleged tortfeasor) fell below the standard of conduct of a reasonable person under the same or similar circumstances

cause

substantial factor in bringing about the harm

damages

general: non-economic

special: economic

punitive: intended to punish and/or set an example

contributory negligence

conduct on the part of the plaintiff that is a contributing cause of her own injuries, and that falls below the standard to which she is required to conform to for her own protection

workers compensation

strict liability upon the employer if the employee is hurt in the course and scope of employment (unless employee is intoxicated or the injury is self inflicted)

animals

-domestic animals: trespassing livestock such as horses, cattle and sheep but not household pets

-domestic animals with known dangerous propensities (California exception for dogs, included)

-wild animals: strict liability for their normally dangerous propensities (lion, tiger), if trip and fall over snak no negligence only if it bites you

ultra-hazardous or abnormally dangerous activities

blasting, fumigation, fireworks

product liability

the manufacturer and others may be strictly liable to a person injured by a product if the product was: defectively manufactured, defectively designed, inadequate warnings were given concerning the product