Torts Outline

Torts Outline
Kautsch Fall 2005

1) Overview: Development Based Upon Fault

a) Definition of tort: civil wrong, other than a breach of contract
i) Tortfeasor breaches a duty
ii) May be liable
iii) Duty to be reasonable
iv) Imposed by society

b) System concerned with rule of law
i) Protect from passion and prejudice
(1) Opposite of force
(2) Set of procedures
ii) Emphasis on impartiality

c) Four major purposes of tort law
i) Provide a peaceful means for adjusting the rights of parties who might otherwise “take the law into their own hands”
(1) Concerned with fairness
(2) Shift the burden of proof
ii) To deter wrongful conduct
(1) Weaver v. Ward: if intent to do harm there should be liability. Only excused from liability it utterly without fault
iii) To encourage socially responsible behavior
iv) To restore injured parties to their original condition

d) Interests protected
i) Bodily integrity
(1) Anonymous: disregard for frame of mind
(2) Expanded to include defamation of character and emotional distress
ii) Right to self determination
iii) Exclusive possession of property

2) Intentional Torts include battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels

a) Intent
i) Actor’s intent to invade legally protected interest of another without consent is shown by:
(1) Specific Intent: And act done for the purpose of causing a given consequence
(2) Envisioned Intent: Knowledge that the consequences are substantially certain to result from his act
(a) Garrent v. Dailey: act must be done for the purpose of causing the contact or an apprehension or with knowledge on the part of the actor. Boys pulling a chair from under aunt was substantially certain to cause injury
(b) Spivey v. Battaglia: Intent does not have to be hostile or a desire to do harm. D put his arm around plaintiff in effort to tease her. She shifted her head and injury resulted.
(i) Distinction b/w intentional tort and negligence
(ii) Appreciation of a risk, foreseeable risk = negligence
(iii) Risk is substantially certain = intentional
(iv) Continuum of Probability: specific intent – general intent—recklessness –failure to fulfill duty
(c) Ranson v. Kitner: appellants are liable for the damages caused by their mistake despite that they were acting in good faith. Innocent mistake concerting a material fact will not normally prevent a finding of intent
(i) Hunting wolves and killed dog
(ii) Argument that they were acting in good faith does not preclude liability
ii) Capacity to have intent
(a) Children: Garrent v. Dailey: when a minor has committed a tort with force he is liable to be proceeded against as any other person.
(i) Learn at early age that certain acts will have certain results
(ii) Age, intelligence and maturity are relevant only to the question of whether a child apprec