View - American University Washington College of Law

Torts Outline – Fall 2009 Prof. Hunter Table of Contents I.

General purposes of torts ......................................................................................................... 1

a.

Deterrence ................................................................................................................................ 1

b.

Compensation for victims ........................................................................................................ 1

c.

Shaping positive behavior in society ....................................................................................... 1

d.

Through balancing of plaintiff’s and defendant’s interests ..................................................... 1

II.

Intentional Torts ................................................................................................................... 1 a.

General elements .................................................................................................................. 1

b.

Battery .................................................................................................................................. 1

c.

Assault.................................................................................................................................. 1

d.

False Imprisonment – ........................................................................................................... 2

e.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress ........................................................................ 2

f.

Privileges.............................................................................................................................. 3 i.

Consent ............................................................................................................................. 3

ii.

Self-Defense ..................................................................................................................... 3

iii. Necessity .......................................................................................................................... 4 III.

Negligence ........................................................................................................................... 4

a.

Duty...................................................................................................................................... 4 i.

Reasonableness of risk ..................................................................................................... 4

ii.

Duty of Care ..................................................................................................................... 4

iii. Effect of individual characteristics on reasonableness ..................................................... 5 1.

Age................................................................................................................................ 5

2.

Physical impairment ..................................................................................................... 5

3.

Physical/mental health .................................................................................................. 6

iv. Expertise ........................................................................................................................... 6 d. v.

Doctors.......................................................................................................................... 7 Industry standard .............................................................................................................. 7

vi. Legal standard (negligence per se) ................................................................................... 7 1.

Existence of Duty ......................................................................................................... 7

2.

Defenses........................................................................................................................ 8

vii.

Analysis of specific duties ............................................................................................ 9

viii.

General exceptions to the reasonable man standard ..................................................... 9 i

1. b.

Emergency doctrine ...................................................................................................... 9

Breach of Duty ................................................................................................................... 10 i.

Informed consent ............................................................................................................ 10

2.

Conflict of interest .......................................................................................................... 10

ii.

Res Ipsa Loquitur ........................................................................................................... 10

iii. Constructive notice of breach ......................................................................................... 11 iv. Failure to Act .................................................................................................................. 12 c.

Cause in Fact ...................................................................................................................... 12 i.

“But for” principle .......................................................................................................... 13

ii.

Substantial Factor ........................................................................................................... 13 1.

Lost Chance Doctrine – .............................................................................................. 13

iii. Expert testimony regarding cause .................................................................................. 13 iv. Concurrent Causes.......................................................................................................... 14 v. d.

Multiple potential causes ................................................................................................ 14 Proximate Cause ................................................................................................................ 14

i.

Generally ........................................................................................................................ 14

ii.

Foreseeability of risk ...................................................................................................... 14

iii. Public Policy considerations .......................................................................................... 15 iv. Rescue Doctrine ............................................................................................................. 15 v.

Intervening Causes ......................................................................................................... 16

vi. Superceding cause – ....................................................................................................... 16 e.

Damages ............................................................................................................................. 17 i.

Public policy concerns ................................................................................................... 17

ii.

Extent of liability............................................................................................................ 17

iii. Emotional Distress ......................................................................................................... 17 f.

Defenses ............................................................................................................................. 17 i.

Plaintiff’s Conduct ......................................................................................................... 17

ii.

Assumption of Risk ........................................................................................................ 18

IV.

Strict Liability .................................................................................................................... 18

a.

Products Liability ............................................................................................................... 18 i.

Generally – ..................................................................................................................... 18 ii

ii.

Manufacturing Defect .................................................................................................... 19

iii. Design Defect ................................................................................................................. 20 iv. Warning Defect .............................................................................................................. 20 b.

Dangerous Activities .......................................................................................................... 20

c.

Wild Animals ..................................................................................................................... 21

V.

Joint and Several Liability ................................................................................................. 21

a.

Allows for multiple defendants to each bear full liability for injuries when: .................... 21 i.

Defendants acting in concert – ....................................................................................... 21

ii.

Defendants fail to perform a common duty to the plaintiff –......................................... 22

iii. Defendants acted independently but caused an indivisible harm – ................................ 22 b.

Contribution ....................................................................................................................... 22

VI.

Vicarious Liability (Respondeat Superior) ........................................................................ 23

a.

Respondeat Superior .......................................................................................................... 23

b.

Independent Contractors .................................................................................................... 24

c.

Joint Enterprise .................................................................................................................. 24

VII.

Remedies ............................................................................................................................ 24

a.

Nominal Damages .............................................................................................................. 24

b.

Compensatory Damages .................................................................................................... 25 i.

Calculation ..................................................................................................................... 25

ii.

Unique Circumstances.................................................................................................... 25

iii. Collateral-Source Rule ................................................................................................... 25 iv. Standard for Review ....................................................................................................... 26 c.

Punitive Damages .............................................................................................................. 26

d.

Satisfaction and Release .................................................................................................... 26

iii

Torts Outline – Fall 2009 Prof. Hunter I.

General purposes of torts a. Deterrence b. Compensation for victims c. Shaping positive behavior in society d. Through balancing of plaintiff’s and defendant’s interests

II.

Intentional Torts a. General elements i. Action which led to injury must have been intentional (not the effect), and 1. Child could have intentional committed tort. See Garrat v. Dailey (pulled a chair out from under an old woman). 2. Mentally ill person can also intentionally commit a tort. See McGuire v. Almy (nurse hit by mentally ill girl when she attempted to take away a chair leg from her). ii. The person must have known or should have known with substantial certainty that his action would cause the type of injury that resulted. iii. Transfer of intent – intent of tortfeasor can be transferred within a particular writ or between the historic ones (trespass to property, trespass to chattels, battery, assault, conversion, etc.) 1. Mistake in fact does not negate intentional tort liability. See Ranson v. Kitner (man shot dog instead of wolf); 2. Attempt to batter one person which leads to another person’s battery still allows for liability. See Talmage v. Smith (man threw stick at one boy playing on his shed and accidentally hit another one). iv. No actual damages need be proven as the injury is the commission of the tort itself. b. Battery i. Definition - Act must be a harmful touch of another done in anger. See Cole v. Turner; 1. Defendant must have intended to cause the type of harm that resulted. Spivey v. Battaglia (man who gave unsolicited hug to coworker made an offensive, not a harmful touch where he intended no injury). 2. A warning touch that is not “rude, insolent, or angry” does not rise to a battery. See Wallace v. Rosen (parent of student tapped on shoulder during fire alarm and at some point fell down stairs). 3. Touching items in someone’s hand amounts a touch of their person, especially when accompanied with insult. See Fisher v. Carousel Motor Hotel, Inc. (hotel employee grabbed plate from back worker and said racial epithet). c. Assault i. Definition – unlawful attempt to commit battery which was incomplete by reason of some intervening cause 1

ii. Elements – 1. Create in the mind of the alleging party a well-founded fear (for a reasonable person)of an imminent battery, (no assault where plaintiff was not aware) 2. coupled with the apparent present ability of defendant (to a reasonable person) to imminently effectuate the attempt. 3. See Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hill (man attempted to reach over the counter to touch female customer; jury q as to whether defendant could have reached plaintiff). iii. No actual injury need be incurred by the plaintiff. See I de S et ux. v. W de S (woman avoided swung hatchet by drunken man). d. False Imprisonment – i. Elements 1. Intent to confine a. Confinement need not be an actual jail cell but can be any material limitation of freedom. See Whittaker v. Sanford (woman not allowed off of yacht without supervision and unable to get to shore without smaller boat). 2. Consciousness of confinement a. See Parvi (can use circumstantial evidence to present consciousness even if have no current recollection of the event). 3. Lack of consent a. False imprisonment cannot occur where the detainee was free to leave and voluntarily would have remained to clear herself of allegations. See Hardy v. La Belle’s Distributing Co. (employee went to security office to clear herself of theft accusation). 4. Not privileged a. Typically a bonafied arrest will not give rise to a false imprisonment claim unless the arrest was had nothing to actually do with the criminal conviction. See Enright v. Groves (woman arrested for leashless dog claim though actually was because she refused to show driver’s license). e. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress i. Elements 1. The conduct must be intentional or reckless 2. Conduct must be extreme or outrageous 3. There must be a causal connection between the wrongful conduct and the emotional distress 4. The emotional distress must be severe. 5. See Harris v. Jones (man with stutter persistently made fun of at work).

2

ii. Mere vulgarity will not rise to the severe level of inflicting emotional distress. See Slocum v. Food Fair Stores of Florida (woman insulted, “you stink,” in store when she asked the price). iii. Used when assault cannot be claimed because threat not imminent. See State Rubbish Collector’s Ass’n v. Siliznoff (association threatened plaintiff for encroaching on their “territory” but without clear threat of imminent harm). iv. Normal standards of sensitivity of a reasonable person used in determining severity of the infliction. See Harris v. Jones (stuttering man made fun of at work was not IIED as matter of law). v. Cannot transfer intent because not one of the historic writs of trespass and therefore the inflictor must be aware that the injured party in particular would be affected. See Taylor v. Vallelunga (woman could not claim IIED because people who beat her father didn’t know she was present). f. Privileges i. Consent 1. Silent consent normally not allowed but is acceptable when objective manifestation makes it obvious that plaintiff took steps to be touched and was aware of situation. See O’Brien v. Cunard S.S. Co. (woman on immigration ship got in line to be inoculated). 2. Cannot normally assume the risk of an intentional tort and therefore even violent activities are consider within rules and customs of the activity. See Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals (jury could find that illegal blow in football created liability). 3. Consent is interpreted narrowly and therefore unless generally laid out cannot allow for similar actions. See Mohr v. Williams (woman did not consent to operation on her right ear when she was put under anesthesia for treatment on the left one). 4. Consent cannot be delegated to a third party unless done so explicitly. See Mohr v. Williams (woman did not give family physician permission to consent to operation for her). 5. Consent is invalidated if it was obtained under fraud or through misrepresentations. See De May v. Roberts (woman giving birth only allowed man into the room with the doctor under the belief that he was a professional assistant). ii. Self-Defense 1. Entitled to use reasonable force to defend oneself against the threat of force of another 2. Retaliation not allowed under self-defense 3. Reasonable belief of harm analyzed under reasonable person standard under the circumstances 4. Verbal threats are not typically enough to permit self-defense 5. Retreat - individual must retreat if they can rather than injure the attacking party (question as to how much) 3

6. Force that could cause serious bodily harm or death can only be used in cases of imminent threat of substantial bodily harm to the user and not to defend property. See Katko v. Birney (springloaded shotgun in bedroom of abandoned home unreasonable). iii. Necessity 1. May commit a trespass of property or chattels in order to serve a public interest. 2. When committing a trespass to serve a private interest in avoiding harm from act of God, including self-interest, generally liable for damages caused (i.e. for ship that tied itself to dock during storm). III.

Negligence a. Duty i. Reasonableness of risk 1. Ordinary care is determined by the circumstances and generally involves the prudent and cautious care men would use in the situation to guard against probable danger. 2. Ordinary care includes taking steps to prevent risks even if they are less than 50% likely to cause harm. Risk assessment is based on both on probability and potential magnitude of harm. See Gulf Refining Co. v. Williams (oil supplier’s failure to fix faulty cap which caused injurious explosion liable even if danger unlikely). 3. Question is not the balancing of probabilities but the existence of some possibility of sufficient moment. See Tullgren v. Amoskeag Mfg 4. There is no difference in analysis between the ordinary care needed for necessary v. permissible acts. See Brown v. Kendall (man accidentally hit other in the eye with a stick when attempting to separate fighting dogs). 5. Balancing test may be used to weigh the risk of harm presented and the cost of preventing it. See Chicago B & Q R. v. Krayenbuhl (train liable for girl’s lost leg when caused by turntable that was not locked up). 6. Judge Learned Hand proposed the formula of Burden