CH 6 LGS NOTES
The Basis of Tort Law
Tort = A civil wrong (not a crime or a broken contract) where someone's action causes harm or injury to another person. It's about when someone has a legal duty to act a certain way, fails to do so, and that failure directly causes harm.
Two main ideas behind all torts:
Wrongs: Tort law helps people who have been hurt or lost something because of another person's wrong action.
Compensation (Remedy): In a tort case, one person sues another to get money or other help for the harm they suffered.
The Purpose of Tort Law
Purpose: To offer solutions (remedies) when someone's protected rights (like personal safety or property) have been violated.
Society believes in protecting property, so tort law provides ways to get compensation if property is damaged or destroyed.
Remedies – Tort Damages
Damages = The money awarded by a court to someone who has been harmed, either from a broken contract or a tortious act.
Important difference: damage vs. damages
Damage = The actual harm or injury to people or property.
Types of damages:
Compensatory (to make up for the loss)
Punitive (to punish the wrongdoer)
Laws in some places might limit how much money can be awarded, especially for punitive and general damages.
Remedies – Tort Damages: Compensatory
Compensatory damages = Money given to equal the actual cost of injuries or damage suffered.
Two types:
Special damages: Easy-to-count money losses (like hospital bills, fixing damaged property, lost wages now and in the future).
General damages: Harder-to-measure harms (like pain and suffering, emotional distress). Businesses usually can't get general damages.
Remedies – Tort Damages: Punitive
Punitive damages = Money awarded to punish the person who caused the harm and to prevent others from doing similar bad things in the future.
When they apply:
Used when the person's conduct was really bad or outrageous.
Usually given for intentional torts and rarely for negligence; they might be awarded in cases of gross negligence.
Gross negligence = When someone intentionally fails to do an important duty, not caring about the potentially severe consequences for another person's life or property.
Punitive damages must follow fair legal rules under the U.S. Constitution.
Remedies – Tort Damages: Legislative Caps
State laws can limit (cap) the amount of damages, particularly for punitive and general damages.
Caps for non-economic general damages (like pain and suffering) often range from to , especially in medical malpractice cases.
Over states limit punitive damages, and some even completely ban them.
Types of Torts
Torts are divided into two main groups:
Intentional torts: Happen when someone purposely commits a wrongful act against a person or their property (they meant to do the act and cause the result).
Unintentional torts (negligence): Happen when someone acts carelessly and breaks a duty to act reasonably, causing harm (they didn't mean to cause harm, but their carelessness did).
Intentional Torts against Persons
Intentional tort = A wrongful act done on purpose. The tortfeasor (the person who commits the tort) must have meant to do the action and cause the consequences, or known those consequences were almost sure to happen.
An evil or harmful reason isn't necessary for an intentional tort.
Transferred intent: If someone intends to harm one person but accidentally harms another, the second person can sue for an intentional tort.
Example: Alex swings a bat at Blake but hits Carson instead. Carson can sue Alex for battery.
Intentional Torts against Persons – Transferred Intent
Example: Alex wanted to hit Blake with a bat but hit Carson. Carson can sue Alex for battery.
Intentional Torts against Persons
Here are some intentional torts against people:
Assault
Battery
False Imprisonment
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)
Defamation (Libel and Slander)
Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Abusive or Frivolous Litigation
Intentional Torts against Persons – Assault
Assault = Any words or actions that make another person reasonably fear immediate physical harm. It's a believable threat of harm.
An assault can happen even if no physical contact occurs, as long as it creates a reasonable fear that harm is about to happen.
Intentional Torts against Persons – Battery
Battery = An intentional (unwanted) touching of another person without their permission. Actual physical injury is not required.
The contact can be harmful or simply offensive (judged by what a reasonable person would find offensive).
Contact can involve any part of the body or anything attached to it, or something the defendant set in motion (like throwing a rock).
If offensive contact occurs, the person harmed might get damages for emotional distress or damaged reputation, in addition to any physical injuries.
Intentional Torts against Persons – Example: Assault and Battery
Ivan threatens Jean with a gun (this is assault) and then shoots her (this is battery).
Intentional Torts against Persons – False Imprisonment
False imprisonment = Intentionally holding or restricting another person's activities without good reason (justification).
This can be done with physical barriers (locked doors), physical restraint (tying someone up), or threats of force.
It interferes with a person's freedom to move. It's important that the person being held doesn't want to be held.
If the person agrees to be held, then there's no liability for false imprisonment.
Intentional Torts against Persons – False Imprisonment: Example
A casino holds a person to demand identification. A court found the casino liable because they didn't have a legal reason to detain the person.
Intentional Tort against Persons - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
IIED = An intentional act that is so extreme and shocking that it causes severe emotional suffering.
The conduct must be truly outrageous, going beyond what society would normally accept as decent behavior.
Example: Repeated harassment with threats (like stalking) can be considered IIED.
Intentional Tort against Persons - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: Example
A father handcuffs a man to a steel pole and threatens to kill him to force him to leave town. This could be considered IIED.
Intentional Tort against Persons - Defamation
Defamation = A false statement of fact that is told to a third party and harms a person's good name, reputation, or character.
Libel = Defamation in a written form or other permanent forms (like a digital recording or a newspaper article).
Slander = Defamation spoken aloud.
Intentional Tort against Persons – Defamation: Elements
1) A false statement of fact.
2) The statement must be understood as being about the person suing (the plaintiff) and harmful to their reputation.
3) The statement must be published (communicated) to at least one other person besides the plaintiff.
4) If the plaintiff is a public figure, they must also prove "actual malice" (explained below).
Defamation: Element #1 – Statement-of-Fact
Negative comments about someone aren't defamation unless they are false and presented as facts.
Statements of opinion are protected by the First Amendment and usually aren't defamation.
Example: Saying "Lane cheats on his taxes" (if false) can be defaming. But saying "Lane is a jerk" (which is an opinion) is not defamation.
Defamation: Element #2 – Statement About Plaintiff
This means the statement clearly refers to the plaintiff, either by name or by implication, so people understand it's about them.
Defamation: Element #3 – Publication
Publication means the statement was shared with others, whether on purpose or by accident.
Even if someone just overhears it, that can be enough.
If others repeat the false statement, the original author could also be held responsible.
Without the statement being shared (published), there's no defamation claim.
Defamation: Element #4 – Public Figure and “Actual Malice”
When false statements are made about public figures (like government officials, politicians, celebrities, or well-known businesspeople), the law requires a higher standard to prove defamation.
Public figures must prove actual malice, which means the person who made the statement either knew it was false or acted with a careless disregard for the truth.
Defamation: Example
A customer posts a negative online review with incorrect details and names a specific employee (who is not a public figure). The statement is "published" as soon as the review is put online.
Defamation: Damages
Libel: If libel is proven, general damages are assumed. The plaintiff doesn't need to prove they actually suffered harm.
General damages pay for harms that are hard to measure, like humiliation, damage to reputation, or emotional distress.
Slander: For slander, the plaintiff usually has to prove special damages (actual financial losses) to get compensation.
If these special damages can't be proven, the slander lawsuit might fail.
Defamation: Damages – Slander Per Se
There are certain types of slander, called slander per se, where the plaintiff doesn't need to prove special damages because the statements are considered so harmful that damage is assumed.
Four common types of slander per se:
A statement that someone has a serious, contagious disease (like a sexually transmitted disease).
A statement that someone has acted wrongly in their job or business.
A statement that someone has committed a serious crime or been imprisoned for one.
A statement that a person is not morally pure or has engaged in serious sexual misconduct.
Defenses: Defamation
Truth is a complete defense: If the statement is true, it cannot be defamation.
Privilege: Some statements are protected by law (either absolute privilege or qualified privilege).
Defenses can vary depending on the specific state laws.
Defenses: Privilege
Privilege = The legal right to say something without being sued, even if it might harm someone's reputation.
Absolute privilege: Applies only in very specific situations, like during court proceedings or within certain government discussions (e.g., statements made by lawyers or judges during a trial).
Qualified privilege: Applies when statements are made in good faith and only shared with people who have a legitimate reason to know the information (e.g., an employer's written evaluation of an employee).
Invasion of Privacy
Right to privacy = The right to be left alone and free from public intrusion into personal matters. Courts recognize this right based on various laws and constitutional amendments.
This tort protects people's privacy rights.
Invasion of Privacy: Potential Causes of Action
1) Intrusion into someone's private life or solitude (e.g., breaking into their home, searching their laptop, wiretapping their phone).
2) False light (e.g., publishing information that makes a person appear in a way they are not, or attributing ideas to them that they don't hold).
3) Public disclosure of private facts (e.g., a newspaper printing embarrassing details about someone's private life that are not of legitimate public concern).
4) Appropriation of identity (using a person's name, image, or likeness for commercial purposes without their permission).
Many states have specific laws that protect against appropriation, sometimes called the "right of publicity."
Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Fraudulent misrepresentation = A false statement or withholding of an important fact, made knowingly to trick someone, which a reasonable person relies on, causing harm to the tricked person.
Puffery = Exaggerated claims about quality (like "This is the best car ever!"). These are opinions and not usually considered legally binding promises or misrepresentations.
Fraudulent Misrepresentation: Elements
1) A false statement about important facts or conditions, made with knowledge that it's false or without caring if it's true or false.
2) The person making the statement intended for others to rely on this false information.
3) The deceived person justifiably relied on the false statement (meaning their reliance was reasonable).
4) The deceived person suffered harm (damages) because of this reliance.
5) There was a direct link (causal connection) between the false statement and the injury.
Fraudulent Misrepresentation: Element #1 – Statement of Fact
Reliance must be on a statement of fact, not just an opinion.
However, relying on an opinion can count if the person giving the opinion has special knowledge (e.g., a lawyer giving a legal opinion).
Litigation Lacking Legal Basis
The law aims to protect individuals from being sued without a good reason.
Torts related to unfair lawsuits:
Malicious prosecution: Starting a lawsuit out of spite and without any real legal basis. The person who started the bad lawsuit can be held responsible if they lose.
Abuse of process: Misusing any legal procedure against someone else to achieve a goal that the legal process wasn't designed for.
Difference: Abuse of process isn't limited to just starting a prior lawsuit and doesn't require proving malice (spite).
Intentional Torts Against Persons – Summary
Assault and Battery: Intentional, unexcused acts that cause fear of immediate harm (assault) or actual unwanted contact (battery).
False Imprisonment: Intentionally holding someone against their will without justification.
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: Extreme, outrageous behavior causing severe emotional suffering.
Defamation: A false statement of fact that harms someone's reputation. Public figures need to prove "actual malice."
Invasion of Privacy: Includes intruding on private matters, portraying someone in a false light, publicly revealing private facts, or using someone's identity without permission.
Fraudulent Misrepresentation: Making false statements about important facts with the intent to deceive, and the person sues successfully after relying on the false information.
Litigation Lacking Legal Basis: Covers malicious prosecution (wrongfully starting a lawsuit) and abuse of process (misusing legal procedures).
Intentional Torts Against Property
Property rights are protected by law. There's a difference between real property and personal property.
Real property = Land and anything permanently attached to it (like a house).
Personal property = All other items that aren't land or attached to it (like cash, cars, or furniture).
Intentional Torts against Property – Types
Here are some intentional torts against property:
Trespass to Land
Trespass to Personal Property
Conversion
Disparagement of Property
Intentional Torts Against Property – Trespass to Land
Trespass to land = Entering onto, flying over, or digging underneath land owned by someone else without permission; or causing something (like water) to enter; or staying on the land without permission after being asked to leave.
Actual damage to the land is not required for it to be trespass.
Trespass to Land: Elements – Permission to Enter
The owner must show that the person was a trespasser (e.g., by posting "No Trespassing" signs).
An implied trespasser is someone who enters to commit an illegal act (like a thief), even if there are no signs.
Trespass to Land: Liability of Landowner
Historically, a trespasser was responsible for any damage they caused, and the owner wasn't usually responsible if the trespasser got hurt.
Many places now have different rules, requiring landowners to exercise a "reasonable duty of care" depending on who is entering their property.
Attractive nuisance doctrine: Landowners can be held responsible if young children are attracted to and injured by dangerous features on their property (like a swimming pool).
Trespass to Land: Defenses
Defense: The trespass was justified (e.g., entering a burning building to help someone in danger).
Licensee: Someone with a temporary, revocable right to enter another person's land (e.g., a meter reader). If that permission is taken back, the person becomes a trespasser.
Trespass to Personal Property
Types: Unlawfully taking or harming someone else's personal property; or interfering with their right to exclusively use and possess it.
Harm includes destruction or a decrease in the item's value, condition, or quality.
Conversion
Conversion = Wrongfully taking, using, or keeping someone else's personal property as if it were your own.
Failing to return borrowed goods can be conversion.
Even if you initially had permission to take the item, not returning it might become conversion.
Conversion: Element - Intent
Conversion can happen even if the person who took the goods honestly believed they had a right to them.
Having good intentions is not a defense.
Example: Someone who buys stolen goods (even unknowingly) can be sued for conversion and must return the goods or pay the full value to the true owner.
Disparagement of Property
Disparagement of property = Making false statements about another person's product or property that cause financial harm.
Slander of quality (trade libel): A false statement published about a person's product that causes others to stop buying from them. The plaintiff must show real financial losses.
Slander of title: A false statement published that challenges someone's ownership of property, causing them financial loss.
Trespass to Land, Personal Property, Conversion, Disparagement of Property – Summary
Trespass to land: Entering someone else's real property without permission.
Trespass to personal property: Interfering with an owner's right to use or possess their personal property.
Conversion: Wrongfully taking or using someone else's personal property as if it were your own.
Disparagement of property: False statements that harm a product or property's reputation, including "trade libel" (slander of quality) or "slander of title."
Business Torts - Types
These torts focus on unfairly interfering with another business's rights.
Two main types:
Wrongful interference with a contractual relationship (breaking an existing contract).
Wrongful interference with a business relationship (disrupting normal business dealings).
Business Torts – Wrongful Interference with a Contractual Relationship
Three parts must be true for this tort:
1) There is a valid, enforceable contract between two parties.
2) A third party knows this contract exists.
3) The third party intentionally (on purpose) causes one of the parties to break the contract.
Business Torts - Wrongful Interference with a Business Relationship
Businesses are not allowed to unreasonably interfere with another company's business activities just to gain more customers for themselves.
There's a difference between fair competition and predatory behavior.
Predatory behavior = Actions done with the unlawful goal of driving competitors out of business.
The plaintiff (the harmed business) must show that the defendant used unfair methods to hurt an existing business relationship or to prevent a potential future business gain.
Business Torts - Defenses
A defendant won't be held responsible if their interference was justified or allowed by law.
Normal, fair competition (like marketing or advertising) is allowed, even if it causes a competitor to lose a contract.
Unintentional Tort: Negligence
Negligence = Failing to act with the reasonable care that a typical person would use in similar circumstances. This failure creates a risk of harm that you should have seen coming (foreseeable).
If an action doesn't create any risk, it's not negligence.
Not an Intentional Tort? - Negligence
Difference: An intentional tort is when you knowingly commit a wrongful act. Negligence is when you don't intend to cause harm, but your carelessness leads to consequences.
Many actions that could be intentional torts might be considered negligence if there was no intent involved.
Negligence: Elements
1) Duty: The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.
2) Breach: The defendant failed to fulfill that duty.
3) Causation: The defendant's breach caused the plaintiff's injury.
4) Damages: The plaintiff suffered a legally recognized injury.
Element #1 - Duty of Care
A core idea in negligence is the duty to act with reasonable care.
This means you have a duty not to unfairly harm others. Failing to act carefully is negligence.
Reasonable person standard = This is a legal guideline that asks how an average, sensible person would have acted in the same situation. It's not about how a specific individual would act.
Element #1 - Duty of Care: Variations
The duty of care can change depending on the defendant's job or profession, their relationship with the plaintiff, and other factors.
Whether there's a "breach" (failure) of duty depends on how a reasonable person in the defendant's specific situation would have acted.
Element #1 - Duty of Care of Landowners
Landowners must act with reasonable care to protect people who come onto their property from harm.
They must warn business invitees (like customers or clients) about potential, hidden risks. Retailers, for instance, need to find and remove hidden dangers.
Warnings might not be needed for risks that are obvious.
Element #1 - Duty of Care of Professionals
Professionals (like doctors, architects, engineers, accountants, and lawyers) are expected to meet the standards of their specific profession.
Malpractice = Negligence committed by a professional (e.g., medical malpractice by a doctor, legal malpractice by a lawyer).
Element #2 - Breach of Duty of Care
A breach means failing to meet the required standard of care. This can be an action taken or something that was not done (an omission).
To decide if there was a breach, courts consider:
The nature of the action (was it outrageous or common?)
How the action was performed (carefully or carelessly?)
How serious the injury was (serious vs. slight)
Even a small risk of danger might be considered unreasonable depending on the situation.
Element #2 - Breach: Example of Duty of Care and Its Breach
In a fraternity hazing case, pledges drank too much vodka, leading to high blood alcohol levels and one death. The court said the fraternity owed a duty of care to the pledges, and their alleged negligence (failure to act carefully) could proceed to trial.
Element #3 - Causation
For negligence to exist, the defendant's careless act must have caused the plaintiff's injury.
Two questions must be answered:
1) Causation in fact (but-for cause): Would the injury not have happened if not for the defendant's action?
2) Proximate cause (legal cause): Is the injury closely enough related to the defendant's action, and was the injury foreseeable (could the defendant have reasonably predicted it)?Both questions must be answered "yes" for there to be legal responsibility.
Foreseeability is key to proximate cause. If the harm was completely unpredictable, there might not be proximate cause.
Element #3 - Causation: Example
At a train station, a package containing fireworks falls and explodes after being accidentally dropped. Scales then fall from the explosion and injure a woman. A court might decide the railroad wasn't negligent because the injury to the woman from falling scales was not foreseeable from dropping a package. The outcome depends on whether the harm was foreseeable.
Element #4 - Damages
The plaintiff must have suffered an injury that the law recognizes.
Tort law's goal is to pay for the harms and injuries that result from wrongful acts.
Compensatory damages (both general and special) are commonly awarded. Punitive damages are only given in cases of extremely bad behavior.
Element #4 - Damages: Summary
If no injury occurred, then no tort exists.
Punitive damages are only awarded for very serious carelessness (gross negligence) or reckless behavior.
Negligence: Elements – Summary
1) Duty (owed a duty of care)
2) Breach (failed that duty)
3) Causation (the breach caused the injury)
4) Damages (suffered an injury)
Good Samaritan Statutes
These are state laws that protect people who voluntarily help in emergencies (like stopping to help at a car accident) from being sued for minor mistakes or negligence. They are protected unless their actions are reckless and cause further harm.
Doctors or medical staff helping in emergencies are protected, as long as their care isn't so careless it actually makes things worse.
Dram Shop Acts
These are state laws that hold bars/taverns or people who serve alcohol responsible if they serve alcohol to someone who then causes injuries because they are intoxicated.
Social hosts liability: Homeowners who host parties might also be held responsible for injuries caused by their guests if those guests became intoxicated at the party.
Negligence: Defenses
Defendants can defend themselves by arguing that the plaintiff failed to prove one or more of the four elements of negligence (duty, breach, causation, or damages).
Negligence: Defenses
If all four elements are proven, there are three main defenses:
1) Assumption of risk
2) Superseding cause
3) Contributory and comparative negligence
Assumption of Risk
This defense applies when the plaintiff (the injured person) knew about the danger and willingly accepted the risk.
If a person knowingly took on the risk, they usually can't recover damages.
Things to consider:
Did the person know about the risk?
Did they willingly take on that risk?
Assumption of Risk: Example
At a baseball game, a fan known to the risks of getting hit by a baseball while sitting in certain seats. A court might rule that the team isn't responsible if the fan gets hit, due to the fan's implied (unspoken) assumption of risk.
Superseding Cause
A superseding cause is an unexpected, new event or force that completely breaks the link between the defendant's original action and the injury.
If a superseding cause occurs, it can relieve the defendant of responsibility.
Comparative Negligence
This legal idea says that responsibility for careless injuries should be shared among all parties involved, based on how much each person was at fault.
Most states use this instead of contributory negligence.
Forms:
Pure comparative negligence: The plaintiff can still get some money, even if they were more at fault than the defendant (e.g., if the plaintiff was 80% at fault, they can still recover 20% of their damages).
50% rule (modified comparative): The plaintiff cannot recover any money if they were more than 50% at fault. If they were 50% or less at fault, their recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault (e.g., if the plaintiff was 35% at fault, they recover 65% of their damages).
Contributory Negligence
In a small number of states (like Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, and Washington D.C. in limited cases), if the plaintiff's own carelessness contributed at all to their injury, they are completely barred from recovering any damages. This is an absolute bar to recovery.