PMBR Torts

torts and K 34 others 33
remedies inclued in all subjects
need 145 or 130-132 raw
goal 70% or 140 raw
mbe 36%

TOTRS
INtentital tort
Facts must show intent
or substantial certainty
1. A& B no intent
C is correct

INtential Tot Def:
1. Privilege pub necessity
2. Mistake if acting on pub interest
3. consent - scope limit
4. Self defense
5. def of other
6. def of property
7. Recapture bof chattel

2. Sport csent permitted under the rule of the game -- csent to physical contact.

3. When contact results --> assault becomes battery

A no intent when B ducked
C accidental cduct still may be neg
D self def --> intentional tort
B==> correct
4. Car is extension of Asher
B is correct

5. Duty
General no duty owed unless special relationship

Fiends not brelated ==> NO special duty

6, 7
IIED


D; E & O
V; victim
must suffer severve ED

3P : closed family member OR Physical harm/injury
AND Presnece and D is aware

6. no family member
7. D zone of danger ==> neg NOT IIED

8.
A: Neg need damages or physical harm to recover
Exception:
Mishandling corps, no physical harm rqd to recover

C: Battery yes but def of consent
B: reckless conduct b/c of relationship abuse
9. private necessity : liable for damages

CONVERSION
- dominion & control
- serious substantial interference
- no damage rqd
- remedy: force sale: full value
TRESPASS TC:
-Slight Interference
-Slight damage
- recover dimished value.
10. Mistake of ownershio is no def to conversion
11. INTENTIONAL TRESPASS
- intent to enter
- liability even if no damage
NEG/RECKLESS ENTRY
-Liable if only if damage
UNINTENTIONAL & NON_NEG
NO LIABILITY even if damage.

11. mistake is no def
14. SHOPKEEPER privilege
-rsnbly detain suspected person of theft.

FALSE I
- confine in fixed boundary
- Knowledge of confinement OR
- Physical harm ( Not required for small child)

NEG
1. Duty
2. Breach
3. Causation (actual , legal)
4. Damages
5. Defenses

Pick element answer in the above order, i.e., breach over valid def
15. A Breach coose duty first
B: is duty which is correct answer
16. Special relationship - duty to act Teacher- Student , Airline -passenger

C is breach over D causation

TRESPASSER
Unanticipated: NO dty
Anticipated: Dty to warn unless obvious natural condition (lake, creek, NO dty
LICENSEE

- duty to warn of known unsafe condition.

INVITEE
-public
-bus
1. Dty to inspect
2. Dty to make safe
17. just warn known condition
18. Invitee must make safe and inpect.
Attractive Nuisance ( Child trepasser)
1. Artificial cdition on property
2. Know/Should know that children likely to trespass
3. Child with his age, experience, intelligence fails to appreciate the risk of harm
4. Utility v. risk.
NEG PER SE
1. P is a member of a class that the statute intends to protect
2. P's harm is the the type of harm the statute intends to prevent.
Majority : No automatic liability, still go to the jury; NPS is an evidence of neg
20. Did clerk owe duty of care?
NO NPS b/c harm is not the type the statute to prevent.
when noNPS ==> regular neg
21. RES IPSA LOQUITOR -- Inference of NEG
- motion of directed verdict raises RIL
- Harm will not occur w/o neg.
- Instrumentality is in D's exclusive control.
D is correct since NEG has not been proved.

Respondeat Superior (VL)
P v. ER $25K
Eee 's neg ==> ER can seek INDEMNITY from Eee for Eee's neg

No VL for Eee's Intentional Torts unless Eee commited in furtherance of ER's business (Bouncer in a Dancing Club)

Strict Product Liability:
VONS can seek INDEMNITY from Campell for a defective can soup as VONS paid for the foreseeable consumer's harm.

ER has no VL for IC unless:
1. inherently dangerous act OR
2. Non-delegable duty (mall common area safety)

NEG DEFENSES - MBE follows "PURE"
1. PURE comparative NEG
P:40% -D:60% ==> P recover 60%)
2. Modified Comp NEG
P's neg< D's neg ==> Recovery is reduced (P:40% -D:60% ==> P recover 20%)
3. Contributory NEG
hash rule ==> NO recovery
- Last clear chance. OR
- D acted w/ wilfull conduct.

25. P ==> 0% neg, thus full recovery 100K
26. Joint Tortfeasor
Any part of calim satisfied from one tortfeasor will diminish the claim of other tortfeasor.
27.
-act of god
-Intent act of 3P
- criminal act
those 3 are superseding events to cut off chain of liability unless forseeable.

28. Act of god that D knew " it is unsafe.." ==> foreseeable ==>NOT cutoff liability.
29. U Hazardous A SL will not apply superseding events.
If subsequent acts of neg are foreseeable ==> Original D liable for all including subsequent damages.
30. eys patch cause additional harm ==> foreseeable ==> original D liable for both.
31. Neg
32.
UHA
33. SL
Seller of defective product that unreasonbly causes harm to foreseeable users will be SL.
34. No warning reqd:
- if exessive use.
- long period use
- known to public.
37. No foreign language warning rqd
38. Wild animal
HARM SL for both direct and indirect:
- direct: bite SL
- indirect : cause from animal propensity ( duck to void contact with monkey)
40. FRAUD
1. False stmt
2. Scienter
3. Intent to induce
4. Justifiable reliance
5. Causation
6. Damages
If no False stmyt ==> Non-disclosure issue
42. Remedies for nuisance ==> both damages and injunction
44. Defamation
1. Defamation stnmt
2. Publication.
3. Damage
-Slander Per Se CLUB
-Malice
4. PMalice if Pub Figure (P) and Media D
INVASION OF PRIVACY
1. Appropriation
2. False Light - good and bad light
-objectionable to a reasonable person
3. Disclosure of private facts
4. Intrusion of privacy