torts pt 2

pure comparative negligence

plaintiff can recover actual damages less a percentage which is calculated as the amount of negligence attributable to plaintiff

modified comparative negligence

plaintiffs recovery is reduced by plaintiffs own negligence is greater than that of plaintiff, but plaintiff is barred from recovering anything if plaintiffs negligence is greater than the defendants

strict liability

liability without having to prove fault in ultra hazardous activities and products liability

ultra hazardous activities

activities that have an inherent risk of injury and therefore may result in strict liability

products liability

holding manufacturers liable for defective products

remedies for torts

nominal, compensatory, punitive

nominal

right violated, but p can’t prove monetary harm

compensatory

cost of medical bills, replacing property

punitive

punishment

injunction

order to the defendant to do a specific act or to cease doing a specific act

knight v Jewett

football game, sued for negligence, couldn’t recover damages bc she assumed risk by participating

Katko v Briney

unoccupied farm house, person trespassed and was shot, trespasser sued arguing excessive force, ruled in favor of Katko because excessive force isn’t acceptable when protecting property

Anglin v Dep of Transportation

defective road unfixed by dept of transport, question of proximate cause but was actually a factual issue that should be decided by jury, reversed lower courts ruling of summary judgement

Cabanas v Thomas

infliction of emotional distress, court erred on subject matter ruling, reversed ruling in favor of cabaness

Woods v Lancet

infant injured in the womb by negligence of doctor, sought damages for injuries, court held that infant can recover damages for injuries suffered in womb