Torts Jeopardy. Definitions. Duty. Standard of Care. Privileges/ Defenses. Hypos or Potpourri. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 200. 200. 200. 200. 200. 300. 300. 300. 300. 300. 400. 400. 400. 400. 400. 500. 500. 500. 500. 500. Final Jeopardy.
Standard of Care
Hypos or Potpourri
ANSWER: But for the negligent conduct of D, the ensuing injury would not have happened, more likely than not or was defendants’ negligence a substantial factor in Plaintiff’s injury?
QUESTION: What are theories of Proximate Cause in Fact?FINAL JEOPARDY
ANSWER: False Imprisonment. injury would not have happened, more likely than not or was defendants’ negligence a substantial factor in Plaintiff’s injury?
QUESTION: What is Defendant intentionally, by acts or threats, causes Plaintiff to be confined for a significant period of time (to P’s knowledge or harm) to boundaries, tangible or intangible, established by defendant without a reasonable means of escape and without privilege?Definitions-100
ANSWER: Battery injury would not have happened, more likely than not or was defendants’ negligence a substantial factor in Plaintiff’s injury?
QUESTION: Intentionally causing, directly or indirectly, harmful or offensive contact with P’s person or logical extension of P’s Person without consent or privilege.Definitions-200
ANSWER: Assault. injury would not have happened, more likely than not or was defendants’ negligence a substantial factor in Plaintiff’s injury?
QUESTION: What is Defendant, by an overt act directed at Plaintiff, intentionally causes Plaintiff to reasonably believe he/she will immediately suffer an offensive or harmful contact, where the Defendant has the apparent present ability to carry out the batter without consent or privilege?Definitions-300
ANSWER: Intent. injury would not have happened, more likely than not or was defendants’ negligence a substantial factor in Plaintiff’s injury?
QUESTION: What is Voluntarily acting for the purpose of causing X or voluntarily acting with knowledge to a substantial certainty that X will occur.Definitions-400
ANSWER: Objective standard used where person’s conduct is measured against what a person with minimum amount of knowledge would do.
QUESTION: What is the reasonable/prudent person test?Definitions-500
ANSWER: Foreseeability of harm, seriousness of harm possible, and burden on defendant to prevent determine this.
QUESTION: What is the reasonable risk of harm?Duty-100
ANSWER: The (narrow view) of duty to conform to a standard of care of the Plaintiff was promoted by this judge and the opposite view where duty is viewed as duty to the public was promoted by this judge.
QUESTION: What is Cardozo’s view of duty vs. Andrews’ view?Duty-200
ANSWER: Duty owed towards children requires this variation of the normal duty to use reasonable care.
QUESTION: What is liability for harm caused by an artificial condition on land if the place is likely to have child trespassers, involves unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm, children cannot appreciate the harm or cannot discover the harm, and burden of reducing or eliminating is low.Duty-300
ANSWER: Duty to these requires person to warn of latent defects that plaintiff would not be able to discover.
QUESTION: What are Licensees?Duty-400
ANSWER: Duty to these requires person to seek and warn of dangers where as these only require warning once person is identified.
QUESTION: What are Invitees and Trespassers?Duty-500
ANSWER: Handicaps have this effect on the reasonable standard of care.
QUESTION: What is handicapped persons must take precautions, be they more or less, which a reasonable person with the same handicap would take?Standard of Care-100
ANSWER: Children are held to this standard of care. standard of care.
QUESTION: What is a subjective standard—reasonable child of same age, intelligence, maturity, training as defendant in the same circumstances except where activities are considered inherently dangerous?Standard of Care-200
ANSWER: Insanity has this effect on the standard of care. standard of care.
QUESTION: Most courts find NO EFFECT. Few courts have allowed for sudden, unexpected bouts of insanity. Why? Policy reasons—easy to fake, plaintiffs are still damagedStandard of Care-400
ANSWER: Standard that requires one to possess and use the degree of skill and learning of the reasonable or ordinary practitioner in the same school/field in the community in which he practices.
QUESTION: What is the Professional Standard of Care?Standard of Care-500
ANSWER: Express or implied. degree of skill and learning of the reasonable or ordinary practitioner in the same school/field in the community in which he practices.
QUESTION: What is consent?Privileges/Defenses-100
ANSWER: Must be reasonable force in retaliation of a real threat of similar force to self or others
QUESTION: What is self defense or defense of others?Privileges/Defenses-200
ANSWER: Information of material fact adequately given, which if failed to receive such information, plaintiff would have decided differently.
QUESTION: What is Informed Consent Doctrine?Privileges/Defenses-300
ANSWER: If Defendant raises fact that he abided by a statute and therefore is not liable, what must be considered about the statute?
QUESTION: What is 1) Was it a safety statute, 2) Was P an intended person to be protected by the statute, 3) was the harm suffered of a type which the statute intended to protect plaintiffs from?, 4) Is this a negligence per se, presumption of negligence, or evidence of negligence jurisdiction?Privileges/Defenses-400
ANSWER: Statute barring claims after a certain period of time, such as two years.
QUESTION: What is the Statute of Limitations?Privileges/Defenses-500
ANSWER: Defendant throws a stick at a boy on the roof of his shed. The Stick struck another person (Plaintiff) and blinds him. Is Defendant liable and why?
QUESTION: What is yes he is liable on the basis of transferred intent unless defendant successfully argues he was defending his property and did not use unreasonable force?Hypos & Potpourri-100
ANSWER: Mother and 5 year old son, Billy Bob, are walking across Wacker Drive on a green light to go visit the Sears Tower Skydeck when a cabbie fails to stop in time and hits Billy Bob killing him. Billy Bob was running ahead and about 6 feet in front of Mom. Can Mom sue for Mental Distress?
QUESTION: What is maybe under Zone of danger theory (was she in fear of herself too) and yes under Bystander witness and the Present at scene theory?Hypos & Potpourri-200
ANSWER: A bitter Torts student sets Brill’s house on fire when he is not home. The fire dept arrives, rushes into the home, and the Fireman Bob steps on a loose floorboard that Brill didn’t know about, falls through the floor, and breaks both his legs. Can Fireman Bob successfully sue Brill?
QUESTION: What is no because the fireman is considered a bare licensee requiring only Brill to warn of known latent defects that the Plaintiff would not be able to discover? Brill did not have to seek out and warn of dangersHypos & Potpourri-300
ANSWER: Doctor Devin M.D. performs an appendectomy on Mr. Patient. After the surgery he fails to give antibiotics and sends the patient home. Patient dies two days later. What will you consider in your analysis of Mr. Patient’s claim against Dr. Devin?
QUESTION: What is 1) duty, 2) professional standard of care—is the standard within the profession to give antibiotics? School/Practice, skills? Community?Hypos & Potpourri-400
ANSWER: Hotel pool uses drain cap A in all its pool throughout the chain. Industry custom and practice is to use drain cap A. However, drain cap A has been proven to be unsafe, causing swimmers to get suctioned to the drain and, therefore, drowning. News reports have surfaced throughout the country. Drain cap B has been on the market for 2 years and has been shown to be a safer alternative though it costs twice as much. What effect will this have on the Hotel’s liability?
QUESTION: What is the effect of custom might be strong evidence but in the end must pass the reasonable prudent person test and considering the higher standard to invitees?Hypos & Potpourri-500