Intentional Torts Act- Act must be volitional.

Intent- intent to cause damage or knowledge with substantial certainty that injury would occur. Transferred Intent- intends to commit tort against one but injures another. Transfer intent. (TIP: When answering an intentional torts question, start out this way: " will argue that the committed battery. To establish the prima facie case for battery, will have to prove 1. intent, 2. harmful or offensive contact, 3. with plaintiffs person, and 4. causation." Then go through each individual element. (i) Intentional Torts Against Person Battery- 1. harmful or offensive contact (offensiveness judged from reasonable person standard, contact can be direct or indirect), 2. with s person (includes anything connected to - e.g. walking a dog), 3. Intent, 4. Causation. Assault- 1. act by that creates reasonable apprehension (apprehension doesnt mean fear) 2. of immediate harmful or offensive contact (words can negate immediacy) 3. intent 4. causation. False Imprisonment- 1. act or omission by that confines (force, threats, invalid arrest, but not moral pressure) 2. in a bounded area (no reasonable known methods of escape) 3. intent 4. causation 5. damages (damages if actually harmed or is aware of her restrain in movement) Interesting Example- drove to desert and tried to have sex with her. After refused, left her in the desert and drove off. Considered false imprisonment. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress- 1. extreme & outrageous conduct by (beyond all bounds of decency, or continuous offensive conduct or conduct directed at children, elderly, pregnant woman, super sensitive adult and knows) 2. that causes severe emotional distress 3. Intent or recklessness (only intentional tort where recklessness substitute for real intent) 4. causation 5. damages (severe

III. NEGLIGENCE TIP- Start your negligence answer by listing all the elements and then go through each element individually. 1. Duty i. To whom do you owe duty? Foreseeable victims. Majority "Zone of Danger" rule. Minority Andrews ruleOwe duty to everyone. ii. How much precaution is required? Reasonable person standard of care. Two exceptions- if person of superior knowledge about situation (e.g. Doctor) then reasonable professional standard. If person with distinct physical characteristics (e.g. blind) then reasonable blind person standard. Children- standard of child of similar age, experience and intelligence. But if child involved in adult activity, then reasonable person standard. Duty owed by owners/occupiers of land Undiscovered Trespassers- No duty Discovered Trespassers- duty to warn of known, nonobvious, and highly dangerous conditions. Infant Trespassers (Attractive Nuisance)owner has duty to warn or make safe artificial conditions if 1. owner is or should be aware of condition, 2. owner knows or should know that children visit land, 3. children incapacity to appreciate danger, 4. expense of fixing situation lower than the risk presented. Licensee- Duty to warn or make safe known and nonobvious dangerous conditions. Invitees- Duty to warn or make safe nonobvious conditions that owner knew or should have known about. Firefighters Rule- Firefighters and police officers never recover from injury that is inherent condition of the job. Statutory Standard of Care- Two part test to see whether violation of statute

3. Causation Actual Causation- AC is where the is obligated to demonstrate a linkage btw the breach and the injury. But for test Can the convince but for the breach, the accident would not have occurred. Special rules where multiple s: Scenario #1 multiple s and mingled causation. E.g. two unrelated campers forget to put out their camp fires. So two separate forest fires started. Combined fires burn s house and sues both. If we use but4 test, both s will argue that even if I put out fire, other s fire would burn the house. In this case, we use the substantial factor test. Just ask: did each of the s contribute to the injury in a significant way and if yes, joint and several liability. Scenario #2 multiple s and unascertainable cause. We dont have a mingling (Summers v. Tice). Both acted negligently. But one bullet harmed while the other did nothing. CA Supreme Court shifts the burden of proof to the s. One has to show that it wasnt his bullet and if neither can find way out of the case, they are both liable. Legal Causation (proximate cause)Determines fairness of holding liable. Fairness is determined by foreseeability. Legal cause questions are divisible into two categories. 1. Questions involving direct cause fact patters commits the breach and suffers immediately. In a direct cause case, it is almost always foreseeable and therefore fair. 2. Indirect cause cases commits the breach, something else happens, and only then does the suffers injury. There are four specific indirect patters, and in all four is liable. #1 intervening negligent medical treatment we think it is foreseeable that when injure someone, doctors can make things worse. FOOTNOTE doctor is liable too joint liability. #2 intervening negligent rescue it is foreseeable so liable. #3 intervening protection or reaction forces. Foreseeable so proximate cause. #4 subsequent disease or accident e.g. broken leg and then next day falls off crutches, liable for the subsequent injuries. But if indirect fact patter. Then have to do case-by-case analysis. Look at the wrongful conduct and ask: why am I calling it negligent in the first place? Then

emotional distress). Bystander Remedycan only recover if close relative and knows. (ii) Intentional Torts against Personal/Real Property Trespass- 1. physical invasion of s real property (invasion can be by any intangible object e.g. throw ball; property also includes space above and below land to reasonable distance), 2. intent (intent only to go on property. Not required that knows trespassing), 3. causation. Trespass to Chattel- 1. s act that interferes with s rt. to possession of chattel (can be by damage to chattel or dispossession), 2. intent, 3. causation, and 4. Damages (actual damages) Conversion- 1. act by that interferes with s right to possession, 2. interference so serious that must pay chattels full value, 3. intent, 4. causation. is awarded the FMV of chattel @ the time of conversion. (iii) Defenses to Intentional Torts Consent- 1. has to be valid consent ( has capacity to consent, consent cannot be obtained by fraud or deceit), 2. must have remained within the bounds of consent. Two types of consents: Express or Implied Self-Defense- reasonably believes he is about to be attacked and may use reasonable force. (most states require retrieval if can be done before using deadly force, defense not available to initial aggressors, reasonable mistake allowed). Defense of Others- can use force to protect another if reasonably believes the other could use force to defend himself (minority states put in the others shoes). Defense of Property- may use reasonable force to prevent tort against personal/real property. But can never use deadly force unless person poses threat of death or serious injury to others on property. Request to desist or leave must made before using force, unless would be futile. Force may be used to recover property

negligence per se 1. is a member of the class of persons that the statute seeks to protect. 2. Accident is within the class of risks that the statute seeks to prevent. So test- class of person class of risk test! Two Exceptions to this rule: 1. statutory compliance would be more dangerous than statutory violation, then dont borrow the statute. 2. If compliance is impossible under the circumstances, dont borrow the statute Affirmative Duty to Act- Generally no. But duty when 1. cause of peril, 2. common carrier or innkeeper, 3. family relationship, landowner-invitee. If no duty but still rescue, must do it reasonably. Negligent Infliction of Emotional DistressA person being sued for NIED must have committed a negligent act under one of the other duties we talked about (e.g. breach of reasonable prudence, breach of statute, breach of land occupiers) + law requires 2 more factors 1. even though the does not receive direct physical injury, he must have been in the zone of physical danger (e.g. run though red light and almost got hit but didnt. Meets because breached duty, and in zone of danger). 2. must show subsequent physical manifestations of the distress (e.g. heart attack, miscarriage, etc.) Exceptions: no physical symptoms required if 1. Negligently inform that his close family member died or 2. If mishandle corpse of s relative. of the states have bystander distress recovery. Available where a distress witnesses a negligent injury to a close family member. In regular NIED case, fear for own injury, but here emotion is sorrow for seeing a loved one get injured. Close family member differs state-by-state. IN

go to the end of the pattern, is this what I was worried about. If match, then foreseeable and if not, opposite result. Example restaurant serving bad shrimp. Person eats and sick and friend slips on vomit. So ask: why is serving bad shrimp bad outcome broken. This is not a match so not fair to make the restaurant pay for friends broken leg. 4. Damages Eggshell skull doctrine A takes his as he finds the . This rule applies to every tort, not just negligence. Affirmative Defenses to Negligence Historically there were 2 (now abolished by most states) Traditional Contributory defenses Traditional assumption of risk Comparative negligence- begins by establishing that the is guilty of some fault. Failure of the to take reasonable precaution for his/her safety. The jury is instructed to weigh the faults and give each a numerical percentage. s recovery will be reduced in accordance with his percentage of fault. 2 variants: 1. pure comparative negligence go strictly by the jury numbers (this is the default rule on the bar exam). 2. Partial/modified comparative negligence s fault of less than 50% will reduce recovery but if >50% then absolute bar. IV. Strict Liability Elements- 1. Duty (strict), 2. Breach, 3. Causation (actual & proximate), Damages Three Situations Where SL Used 1. Strict Liability for Animals -injury/damage caused by domesticated pets with know vicious propensities

when in hot pursuit or if other came in possession of property wrongfully. If other came in possession lawfully, then peaceful means must be used. Can enter the land of tortfeasor or innocent person to recover property, but if property there due to owners fault, then no privilege and must use legal process to recover. Privilege to Arrest- Officer may arrest for felony if reasonably believes that felony committed and person arrested committed it. A citizen may arrest for felony if felony in fact committed and reasonably believes person committed it. Officer and citizen may arrest for misdemeanor breach of peace if committed in their presence (but deadly force never used for misdemeanor) Necessity- may interfere with personal or real property if necessity. Public Necessity off the hook completely, Private Necessity- Person must pay for damage to property. Discipline- privilege for parents and teachers, but only reasonable force Shopkeepers Privilege- reasonable belief and only for reasonable time & manner.

CA, you have to be there, but in MA, ok if come a minute of 2 later. So not responsible for details. 2. Breach of Duty has to identify what the did wrong. also has to show why the conduct fell short of reasonable prudence. TIP Typical essay format for breach: "Here, plaintiff will allege that the did not act reasonably because he . . . This is not reasonable because . . ." Res Ipsa Loquitur Used by parties who are unable to tell us what went wrong. Must show: 1. Accident which occurred doesnt normally occur in the absence of negligence. 2. This type of accident normally happens because of negligence of someone in s position. Res ipsa is just a way to get to the jury and no promise of victory.

-injury/damage caused by trespassing cattle -injury/damage caused by wild animals 2. Ultrahazardous Activities Activity cannot be made safe, poses a risk of severe harm, activity uncommon in area where conducted. Defenses to Strict Liability Majority has shifted to comparative neg. VI. Vicarious Liability Employer-Employee- respondeat superior (liable if within scope of employment and not frolic). Independent Contractor- not liable, but liable if land owner and invitee injured, also liable if independent contractor engaged in inherently dangerous activity, also liable if liability nondelegable. Auto Owner-Driver- not liable unless driver acting as owners agent. Parent-Kids- Not vicarious liable for kids actions. But may be negligent. Joint Tortfeasors- multiple s, can recover whole amount from any . Contribution- can recover from other s if paid more than his share of liability. Indemnification- situations where vicariously liable and can recover whole amount from tortfeasor.

VII. Random Issues Loss of Consortium- uninjured spouses claim against tortfeasor (loss of services, sex). Kids CANNNOT recover for injuries to parents.