Assault, Elements, Things to Review
Battery, Elements, Things to Review
False Imprisonment, Elements, Things to Review
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Stress, Elements, Things to Review
Land, Trespass of Land, Elements, Things to Review
Personal, Trespass of Chattels, Elements, Things to Review, Conversion, Elements, Things to Review
Defense to Others
Defense to Property
Generally: due care required. P in a negligence action must show that D has a legal duty to protect the plaintiff against an unreasonable risk of harm and D failed to conform his conduct to the legally required standard
Duty, Invitee, Licensee, Tresspasser, unknown - no duty, known, frequent, children
Breach of Duty, Standard of Care, Gen: Reasonably Prudent Person, Children, Negligence Per Se / Statutory, Professional, Res Ipsa Loquitur
Cause in Fact, Multiple Causes, Loss of Chance, Alternative Liability Theory (Summers v. Tice), Market Share Liability
Proximate Cause, foreseeable plaintif, zone of danger, eggshell plaintiff, superseding cause
Damages, compensatory damages
Assumption of Risk
Wild animals are strict liability; Domestic Pet Owner is only liable if D knows of the pets dangerous propensity.
Verify that the harm was caused by the reason that they're dangerous.
elements, Proper P, Proper D, Context, Defective Product, Manufacturer Defect, Warning Defect, Design Defect, Cause In Fact, Proximate Cause, Damages
Contrib. Negl NOT valid defense
Assumption of Risk
unreasonable interference - can be the result of intentional conduct, negligence, or abnormally dangerous activity for which a defendant is strictly liable right common to general public To recover, D must show special damages past what the general public suffers
Requires: [A] substantial and unreasonable interference - can be the result of intentional conduct, negligence, or abnormally dangerous activity for which a defendant is strictly liable [B] interferes with P's use and enjoyment of Land Factors: [B] Value of D's Activities [B] [B] Nature of locality [B] Extent of P's injury [B] Who was there first?
lowers the esteem of a P in teh community or discourages 3rd party from associating with it. Must be  something that can be believed of true or false;  reputation must harmed in the eyes of a substantial minority of reasonable people
Over 20 Ds is too big to bring a suit.
D must intentionally publish info or was negligent (reasonably foreseeable that the comment would be overheard) in publishing the information.
Libel, written or other permanent form
slander, spoke or other non-permanent, per se
 whats the status of the P (public, private figure)  whats the subject matter (public concern or private concern)  what damages does the P seek  whats the status of the D.
D intentionally intrudes on P's zone of privacy; It indrudes on P's privacy if a reasonable person would find it highly offensive
use of P's identity for commercial advantage
True Information P must prove: highly offensive to a reasonable person and not of public concern; disclosure of facts; private facts not newsworthy (this is the key)
stating falsely that someone has cancer or is poor
1) Misrepresentation 2) Scienter (intentional) 3) of past or present fact 4) P justifiably relies 5) Damages
Pure economic loss cannot be recovered unless there are special relationships
D knows of K D acts w/purpose to make K breached or harder to perform
D only had a malicious intent
P must prove 1) false statement 2) actuall malice 3) made to another (published) 4) causing specific economic injury to P