CH 5

CHAPTER 5

I. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS (p. 134)

A. Fraud/Deceit (p. 134)

  1. Misrepresentation (p. 134)

    • The representation made by the defendant must be proven to be false.

    • Involves failure to speak where there is a duty to disclose.

    • Fiduciary Relationship: A legal relationship based on trust (e.g., attorney-client) mandates disclosure of relevant information so that no misleading occurs.

    • Example of Misrepresentation: When purchasing a car, if a seller is asked about any accidents and fails to disclose true information, it is a misrepresentation.

    • Misrepresentation can also occur through conduct (active concealment of defects).

  2. Material (p. 135)

    • A fact is considered material if it influences a reasonable person's decision.

    • Example: Reluctance to purchase a vehicle known to have undergone major repairs indicates the materiality of that fact.

  3. Fact (p. 135)

    • Misrepresentation must pertain to a fact, not opinion.

    • For instance, stating "this car is the best on the market" is an opinion, not a fact.

    • Superior Knowledge Rule: If a party possesses superior knowledge about facts, their opinion may be treated as fact for misrepresentation purposes.

  4. Knowledge (p. 135)

    • This element is referred to as scienter (guilty knowledge).

    • The defendant must know the representation is false.

  5. Intent (p. 135)

    • Representations must be made intending to induce action from another.

    • Casual comments not made with intention of influencing are not considered fraud.

  6. Reliance (p. 135)

    • Plaintiff must show reasonable reliance on the false representation; lack of reliance negates a fraud claim, even if representation is false.

    • Justification for reliance is determined on a case-by-case basis, focusing on the plaintiff's background.

  7. Injury (p. 136)

    • The plaintiff must suffer injury or damages due to reliance on the misrepresentation.

Case Study: Okun v. Morton (p. 136)

  • Facts: Partnership involved in the "Hard Rock Café" concept; plaintiff claimed fraud for undisclosed limitations on trademark rights.

  • Decision: Court found insufficient reliance by the plaintiff, as he could not definitively state whether he would not have entered the contract had he known the truth.

  1. Negligent Misrepresentation (p. 137)

    • Occurs when a false statement is made without reasonable belief in its truth.

B. Remedies (p. 137)

  1. Rescission of the Contract (p. 137)

    • The victim returns what was received under the contract to restore parties to original status before fraud was committed.

    • Example: Victim of deceit regarding diamonds returns them to the seller and receives back the payment.

  2. Affirmance of the Contract (p. 137)

    • The victim may choose to enforce the contract and seek damages instead of rescission.

    • Example: After discovering fraud, a car buyer can keep the car and sue for decreased value.

  3. Punitive Damages (p. 138)

    • These are damages awarded to punish the defendant for malicious, fraudulent or oppressive conduct.

C. Defamation (p. 138)

  1. Definition: Injury to reputation through false statements. Defamation is classified as Libel (written) or Slander (oral).

    • Libel: A false publication injuring reputation.

    • Slander: An oral false statement injuring reputation.

  2. Defenses (p. 139)

    • Truth: An absolute defense against defamation claims.

    • Privilege: Statements made in official proceedings or to interested persons may be protected (absolute or qualified privilege).

D. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (p. 139)

  • This tort involves extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress.

  • Elements:

    1. Conduct must be extreme and outrageous.

    2. Severe emotional distress suffered by plaintiff.

    3. Causation between the conduct and the emotional distress.

E. Assault and Battery (p. 140)

  1. Assault: Occurs when an individual causes another to be in reasonable fear of imminent harm (apprehension).

  2. Battery: Involves actual harmful or offensive contact with another person without consent.

    • Example: Unwanted touching is considered battery regardless of harm.

  3. Defenses (p. 140)

    • Consent, self-defense, and privilege can be defenses against assault and battery claims.

Case Study: Barouh v. Haberman (p. 141)

  • Facts: Dispute over friendly contact in a restaurant that resulted in injury claims.

  • Rulings: Court addressed definitions of unlawful contact and consent in battery claims.

F. False Imprisonment (p. 142)

  • Defined as unlawful violation of personal liberty, involving confinement without legal privilege.

G. Invasion of Privacy (p. 142)

  1. Intrusion: Invasion of privacy through unauthorized physical or electronic intrusion.

  2. Public Disclosure of Private Facts (p. 144): Offensively revealing private information.

  3. Placed in False Light (p. 144): Publicity creating misleading impressions about a person.

  4. Commercial Appropriation of Name: Unauthorized use of a person’s name or likeness for commercial gain (see Fairfield v. American Photocopy Equipment, p. 145).

II. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PROPERTY (p. 146)

A. Trespass to Land (p. 146)

  • Unlawful interference with a person's right to enjoy their land.

B. Nuisance (p. 147)

  • Public Nuisance: Affects a considerable number of people.

  • Private Nuisance: Affects only a specific individual.

    • Example: Lead to claims for stopping activities that interfere with property use (Hellman v. La Cumbre Golf and Country Club, p. 148).

C. Conversion (p. 149)

  • Wrongfully exercising dominion over another's personal property.

III. NEGLIGENCE (UNINTENDED TORTS) (p. 149)

A. Duty (p. 151)

  • A legal obligation to exercise reasonable care to avoid causing harm.

    • Relevant cases: Doe v. Roe, Tarasoff v. The Regents of The University of California.

B. Breach (p. 156)

  • The failure to meet the standard of care required under the circumstances.

C. Causation (p. 156)

  • Must show the defendant's actions caused the injury sustained by the plaintiff.

    • Actual Cause: Direct connection to the injury.

    • Proximate Cause: Foreseeability of harm resulting from the defendant’s actions.

D. Injury to the Plaintiff (p. 157)

  • Liability requires demonstrable harm suffered by the plaintiff.

E. Negligence Per Se (p. 157)

  • A legal doctrine where violation of statutes equates to negligence.

F. Defenses (p. 157)

  • Comparative Negligence: Allows a plaintiff to recover damages proportionate to their fault.

G. Assumption of the Risk (p. 158)

  • Can be either primary or secondary, involving voluntary participation in known risks.

IV. LIABILITY WITHOUT FAULT (p. 159)

A. Absolute Liability (p. 159)

  • Imposed for inherently dangerous activities.

B. Strict Liability (Product Liability) (p. 159)

  • Liability without fault for manufacturers of defective products.

V. TORT REFORM (p. 163)

A. Possible Federal Tort Law Remedies (p. 163)
B. California Tort Law: Some Differ from Federal Law (p. 163)

VI. CHAPTER SUMMARY (p. 165)

VII. CHAPTER PROBLEMS (p. 166)

VIII. TERMS (p. 168)

IX. CHAPTER QUIZ (p. 168)

Course Objective: Distinguish between torts and crimes.

Comparison of Torts and Crimes

  • Crime: A public wrong; the state as plaintiff; primarily statutory law; burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.

  • Tort: A private wrong; private individuals as plaintiffs; mostly common law; burden of proof is a preponderance of evidence.

The information is structured to provide comprehensive insights into intentional torts, negligence, and related legal concepts as outlined in Chapter 5 of the source material.