Penn State Intro to American Law

Tort Law 1-3

Civil Lawsuit in which someone is accused of violating a judge's rule on a statute. In on going injury, one may seek a court order.

• Adversary: In which two opposing parties solve a dispute through a neutral third party

• Substantive Tort Law: Private law made by judges to protect victims

  • corrective justice

    • status quo ante: as it was before

• Fault based liability: At fault only if injury was caused intentionally or through negligence

Brown v. Kendall

The defendant tried to stop two dogs from fighting by hitting them with a stick, and accidentally hit the eye of the plaintiff who was standing behind him. The defendant was not liable because he acted with care. This case established that negligence is when someone does not act with the care of a reasonable person with ordinary prudence considering the circumstances.

Tort Law 4-6

Some intentional torts like battery are also crimes, and the perpetrate can be prosecuted and sued for the same offense.

• Strict Liability in US Law

  • used to discourage exceptionally dangerous activity

  • used in manufacturing, as the public cannot protect themselves from risks they aren’t aware of.

• Res ipsa loquitur: the thing speaks for itself

  • in cases of res ipsa loquitur, the defendant has the burden of proof

  • it can sometimes be unreasonable for the plaintiff to explain how they were injured

Katko v. Briney

Briney installed a shotgun trap to shoot the legs of any intruders in the house he’d inherited despite not living in it. Though Katko ignored the no trespassers sign when entering the home, he was shot an permanently injured, and decided to sue. The court ruled in his favor, deciding that human life and limb is more important than property.

Contract Law 1-2

Contract: A promissory agreement, or a legally protected set of promises.

Mutual Benefit and Time

• Contracts are essentially trade to create mutually beneficial utility or value

• Contracts legally enforces promises that involve the passage of time

Lucy v. Zehmer

The plaintiff and defendant were drinking together when they decided to make a contract for the defendant to sell his farm to the plaintiff. When the plaintiff tried to collect later, the defendant argued he was just joking. Though there was no technical meeting of the minds, the court upheld the contract, as they felt the defendant had acted in a way that could reasonably lead the plaintiff to believe there was a valid contract.

Raffles v. Wichelhous

The plaintiff agreed to sell the defendant cotton that would be delivered from a ship called Peerless. Ironically, the defendant and plaintiff were thinking of two different ships with the same name. The court ruled that the contract could not be upheld, as there was no real agreement.

Frigalment Importing Co. v. BNS International

When creating a contract to buy chickens, the seller did not specify which chickens they would prefer, and assumed they would be getting specifically baby fryer chicken. The seller did not understand this, and thought they would be fine with any chicken available. The court ruled that the buyer had to uphold the contract as it was their responsibility to specify the type of chicken they preferred.

Contract Law 3-4

Not every promise is enforceable under contract law.

• Statute of Frauds: A written agreement is required for transfers of land or sales over $500

  • This is done to prevent the court from enforcing contracts that never existed.

Social promises are not enforceable in contract law. There has to be bargained for exchanges.

Hamer v. Sidway

The plaintiff was told by his uncle that he would receive $5,000 upon his 21st birthday were he to quit drinking, smoking, and gambling.