torts - NYU School of Law
... a. Facts: D’s ship tied to P’s dock to unload cargo & storm got
bad…when done unloading, storm prevented untying. Boat
thrashed against dock causin damage.
b. Held: Qualified priv. 1 who used another’s property for
necessity has the right, but is liable to damage caused. Is
prima F. case. Showed rig ...
26 January 2009
... highway without fault. Duty of easy rescue from common law. Original stalling
out is not negligent and No affirmative duty to put up flairs in general. A
complex act, the first act has no liability, but creates a liability for a second act. If
negligent, unreasonable risks, already on the hook. If n ...
Introduction - NYU School of Law
... b. Operation by different doctor = Battery. Grabowski v. Quigley – Ψ believed he would be
operated on by Dr. Quigley. Ψ placed under anesthesia, then Dr. Quigley is MIA.
i. Ct: Patient alleges facts which, if true, show consent was not given to Bailes and/or Quigley to
perform the surgery as it was ...
Self-Defense by Force Threatening Death or
... - the ability to make a citizen’s arrest is covered by statutes in most states (must be a felony), but in some states this
power is governed by common law.
- shoplifting is usually a misdemeanor
- most states have passed statutes giving shop owners privilege to detain suspected shoplifte ...
... 1. It might take several actors to create the injury, each not necessarily liable. ..............16
2. Even if each act a proximate cause, apportionment must be worked out. ..................16
3. Each factor in concurrent causation must be sufficient -- Aldridge v. Goodyear Tire &
Rubber .......... ...
... subsequently is going to get hurt Negligent Misrepresentation: Hedley Byrne v. Heller: P phoned D asking about X’s credit. D about to close major deals w/ X, lied
with waiver. P relied, X bankrupt, P sued. Relationship between the parties was “sufficiently proximate”, D knew P would rely, BUT D okay ...
Torts - Free Law School Outlines
... iii. If one D settles in suit with more than one liable D, huge problems with getting proportional
contribution from other Ds
c. Mass tort (can’t identify particular manufacturer or exact cause, just increased likelihood of risk)
i. Don't have to attribute specific manufacturer to specific cause -- ...
4. Intentionality, harm and offense, tort remedies
... • Holding: The case is really about damages, there is no question of liability. Trial court jury gave $1000 for
compensatory, appellate cuts that down to $500; the trial court also gave $5000 for punitive damages, the
appellate cuts that down to $2000. Compensatory damages cover actual harm to plain ...
TORTS(2) - Ole Miss LSSB
... D is owner or agent
D had reasonable grounds to believe something was stolen
D used reasonable conduct to investigate (depends on circumstances)
Many states enacted these types of statutes to protect store owners
from being liable for mistake
F. Necessity – Under certain circumstances, nece ...
Torts Outline - Blogs @ Widener Law
... i. Fault is required for intentional wrongdoing.
ii. The plaintiff must plead all of the elements to sustain a cause of action.
b. Elements (Snyder)
i. Battery: Acting with the intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact, and
when that contact results.
ii. Single Intent: intent to cause contact o ...
Manaster Torts Outline
... b. Burden of Proof shifts from P to Ds
c. Judgment is for single sum, represents total value of the P’s injury
d. P entitled to collect from either or both of the Ds, up to but not exceeding the amount of the
e. Some states have gotten rid of this
f. Public policy support:
i. Maximizes like ...
... water should escape, the likelihood of injury to a neighbour is very great. Judges generally
assume that the person who engages in this type of activity is aware of the dangers involved,
and of the potential for harm. As a consequence, they are usually held responsible for any
damage caused if escap ...
Torts Outline - UChicago BLSA
... iii. Wallace v. Rosen: consent assumed for all common and “reasonably
necessary” contact in ordinary life.
i. Negates what would have otherwise been an intentional tort
ii. To whom consent is given
iii. Scope of consent
iv. Info-eliciting: impose liability on who can get info ...
Damages - NYU School of Law
... advantaged people likely to be much higher than damages paid to the
disadvantaged; tort damage liability may create incentive to locate most dangerous
activities/sell more dangerous products in poorest areas; under required liability
insurance schemes we all pay for those with high income & expensiv ...
Virginia Practice Series: Tort and Personal Injury Law
... are considered to be claims for "breach of contract," we discuss
legal malpractice in our work on tort and personal injury law
because they nevertheless involve a number of tort concepts and
In Shevlin Smith v. McLaughlin, the Court held that an attorney cannot be held liable for failing ...
- UVic LSS
... the contrary adduced by the def, an
inference of causation may be drawn
(scientific proof not necessary)
- In cases where P will have difficulty
proving causation due to lack of
knowledge, courts will relax test – only
require some evi that allows inference
Cook v. Lewis once causation is proven
Torts analytical frameworks
... -did D exercise due care that a reasonable person would under the
-does D have any excuse/defense for violating the duty?
-if yes, there may not be a breach
- Polycentric issue: by protecting one group more, you risk greater injury
for another group. (does this go in this category?)
Liability insurance is a part of the general insurance system of risk financing to protect the purchaser (the ""insured"") from the risks of liabilities imposed by lawsuits and similar claims. It protects the insured in the event he or she is sued for claims that come within the coverage of the insurance policy. Originally, individuals or companies that faced a common peril, formed a group and created a self-help fund out of which to pay compensation should any member incur loss (in other words, a mutual insurance arrangement). The modern system relies on dedicated carriers, usually for-profit, to offer protection against specified perils in consideration of a premium. Liability insurance is designed to offer specific protection against third party insurance claims, i.e., payment is not typically made to the insured, but rather to someone suffering loss who is not a party to the insurance contract. In general, damage caused intentionally as well as contractual liability are not covered under liability insurance policies. When a claim is made, the insurance carrier has the duty (and right) to defend the insured. The legal costs of a defense normally do not affect policy limits unless the policy expressly states otherwise; this default rule is useful because defense costs tend to soar when cases go to trial.