Torts I Outline
I. Development of Liability Based Upon Fault.
1. A tort is a civil wrong, other than breach of contract, for which the law provides a remedy.
2. Major purposes of tort law: matter of settling disputes- so people don’t take law into their own hands (keep the peace); to deter wrongful conduct – if consequences (loose $) wont do it again; compensate injured parties – restore them to their original condition, by compensating them for their injury.
3. Insurance is at the heart of compensation. Ins. Co. does not cover for intentional acts.
4. Plaintiff must prove case by a preponderance of the evidence (51%). More likely than not that it appeared the way P showed it happened.
5. History – Originally question of criminal law. If crime then punishment. Intent was not tried. Later it changed.
6. Anonymous: A man who causes an injury to another is liable even though action was lawful and he did it unintentionally.
7. Weaver v. Ward: P injured D while they were engaged in military exercises. D is liable for injurious actions unless D proves the injury was caused without his fault.
8. Brown v. Kendall: In an attempt to break up his own dog from P’s dog, D hits P in the eye and injures him. P must show that D’s act was unlawful or D was at fault. Burden of proof is on P.
9. Cohen v. Petty: One car accident: presumption driver is negligent. P, a passenger in D’s car, suffered injuries when D loses consciousness and his car hits a tree. Held – D not liable in negligence for injury caused by unforeseeable or involuntary actions.
– D, asleep in the rear seat of an automobile, unconsciously pushed with his foot into driver’s seat. D’s arms were forced off the wheel and car crashed. Held – D not liable because did not act with volition.
– What if driver has an epileptic seizure while driving? If u had one before while driving u will be held liable. If this is your first seizure, it is a sudden and unforeseeable illness (like Cohen v. Petty) and u are probably not held liable
10. Spano v. Perini Corp.: P suffered property damage as a result of blasting caused by D. Held – D is liable. In a blasting case there is strict liability without fault or negligence.
II. Intentional Interference with Person or Property.
1. INTENT.
A. Involves the state of mind with which the act is done. If a person act
ane person is capable of forming intent, they may be liable for their acts.
– Flat rule around the country: An insane person is liable for his/her tortuous acts. If intoxicated same rule applies; there is intent.
G. Talmadge v. Smith: D threw stick intending to hit 3rd party but hit P instead. Held – Transferred intent. Rule – an individual who intends an act against one party and instead injures a 3rd party is liable to the third party for the injuries suffered.
– Transferred intent works between individuals and between torts. Ex. If A throws a rock intending to hit B, but instead hits C, A is liable to C for battery (even though he did not intend to hit C). Ex. If A intending to scare B whose back is to A, throws a punch toward B, but instead hits B, A is liable to B for battery (even though he did not intend to hit B).
This Tort to tort transferred intent applies to: battery, assault, false imprisonment, IIED, and trespass
