IntentionalTorts

1. Battery
a.
b.
c.

Intent
Tomakecontact(touch)
Withvictimorthirdparty

2. Assault
a.
b.
c.

Intent
Tocauseimminentapprehensionofcontact
Causesimminentapprehensionofdangerouscontact

3. FalseImprisonment
a.
b.
c.

Intent
TocausePtobeconfined
AndPisawareofconfinement

4. Trespass
a.

Intent
1. ToEnterslandinpossessionofother,or
2. Causesathingorpersontodoso,or
3. Remainsontheland,or
4. Failstoremovefromthelandathingwhichheisunderdutytoremove

b. Trespasstochattel
5. Conversion
6. Privileges/Defenses
a. Defenseofpersonandproperty
i.
ii.

Useleastamountofforcenecessary
Reasonableundercircumstances

b. Necessityprivateandpublic

Battery
1.

Elements:

a. INTENT
i.
ii.

IntenttoharmisNOTrequired
Intenttotouch/contactISrequired

b. TOMAKECONTACT(TOUCH)
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.

Contactmustbeunlawful,harmful,offensive
Noconsenttothetouchotherwisenotoffensive
Dontactuallyhavetotouchpersonsbodygrabalunchtray,couldbebattery
Spasmduetosomethinglikeepilepsynotliable
Someonepushedyouintosomethingelsenotwilful
Butifyouareschizophrenicorhallucinatingyouarestillwillfullytouching

c. WITHVICTIM(ORTHIRDPARTY)

i. Foreseeabilityisnotrequired
2.
Restatement18BatteryOffensiveContact
a. Anactorissubjecttoliabilitytoanotherforbatteryif
i. Heactsintendingtocontactandthatcontactisharmfuloroffensivewiththepersonoftheotherora3rdparty,oran
imminentapprehensionofsuchacontact,and
ii. Anoffensivecontactwiththepersonoftheotherdirectlyorindirectlyresults
b. Anact,whichisnotdonewiththeintentionstatedin(1)(a)doesntmaketheactorliabletotheotherforamereoffensivecontact
withtheotherspersonalthoughtheactinvolvesanunreasonableriskofinflictingitand,therefore,wouldbenegligentorrecklessif
theriskthreatenedbodilyharm.
3.
Restatement19WhatConstitutesOffensiveContact
a. Abodilycontactisoffensiveifitoffendsareasonablesenseofpersonaldignity.

4. INTENT

2
a.
b.

5.

6.

7.

8.

INTENTTOTOUCH+UNLAWFULTOUCHING=LIABLE
EGGSHELLPDOCTRINEtakePasyoufindtheminherentvulnerabilityisnotadefense
i. Rationale:deterrence,compensateVthatdidnothing

Vosburgv.Putney
a. Facts:DkickedPsshinintheclassroomandcausedlegtogolame.Injurieswereunforeseeable.
b. Issue:Isintenttoharmnecessary,orintenttotouchenoughforbattery?
c. Rule:Wherethetouchisunlawful,theintenttocommitthattouchisalsounlawful,andresultinginjurymaygiverisetoliability.
Specificintenttoharmisnotrequiredtofindliability.Itwasunlawfulbctheywereintheclassroomafteritwascalledtoorder.Dififon
playground
d. Holding:Intenttoharmnotrequired.Foreseeabilityofharmisirrelevant.
ImpliedLicenseDoctrineifPgivespermissionforthetouch,thenthetouchcannotbeunlawfulassumptionofrisk.Impliedconsent,given
thecircumstances,makestouchnotoffensive/unlawful
a. Knightv.Jewett
i. Facts:DaccidentlysteppedonPsfingerwhileplayingroughinagameoftouchfootball.
ii. Rule:IfthetouchisunintentionalNOBATTERY.IfthetouchislawfulinthecontextNOBATTERY.Intenttoharm
NOTrequired,intenttoTOUCHis
iii. Issue:Cantouchduringgameofmutualconsenttouchfootballcausingunintentionalharmbebattery?
iv. Impliedlicense:bothpartiesagreedtoplaytouchfootball
v. Holding:touch/actwasnotintentionalsonobattery.(sheconsentedtoroughplay)
TransferredIntentDoctrineholdsDliablewhenheintendstocommitatortagainstonepersonbutinstead
a. commitsdifferenttortagainstthatperson
b. commitssametortasintendedbutagainstadifferentperson,or
c. commitsdifferenttortagainstadifferentperson.
i. Type1transferredbetweenpeoplemeanttohitB,actuallyhitC
ii. Type2assaultintenttoputsomeoneineminentapprehensionofacontact,andyouactuallytouchandthatcontactis
harmfulandoffensive
d. Keelv.Hainline
i. Facts:Dwasintentionallythrowingerasersatboysinclass,buthitP.
ii. Rule:Transferredintentissufficientforintentinbattery.
iii. Holding:IfAintendstocommitbatteryagainstB,andaccidentlycontactsCAisliabletoC!
e. Manningv.Grimsley
i. Facts:Dwasprofessionalpitcher,threwballathecklers,injuringP.
ii. Rule:Transferredintent.Theintenttocauseanassaultwilltransferastheintentneededtocommitabatteryiftheassaultends
inacontact.
iii. Holding:Sufficientintenttocommitanintentionaltort(assault)wasenoughtoholdliableforbattery.
Insanityasadefenseforintent
a. maj.Rule=insanewillbeliablefortheirintent.torts
b. Polmatierv.Russ
i. Facts:D(insaneman)thinksfatherinlawisaspyandshootshim.
ii. Issue:Isbeinginsanesufficienttonegatetheintenttocontactelementofbattery?
iii. Rule:Purelyreflexivereactions(uncontrolled)areNL.ButthefactthatyouareoperatingunderanillusionisNOTadefense
forbattery.
iv. Deterrence:
1. Limitpeoplewhopretendtobeinsaneinordertoescapeliability
2. Createsincentivesforthoseinterestedinthecrazypersonortheirestate,tostopthemfrompermittingthemto
completetheseacts
3. BurdenshifttotheinnocentP
4. Compensationperspectiveinsanepersonmustpaythecosts
v. Holding:Rationalchoiceisntrequired;lunaticsarestillliableintorts.

9. TOMAKECONTACT(TOUCH)
a.

b.

Touchmustbeharmfuloroffensive
i. Whitev.UniversityofIdaho
1. Facts:PsuedDwhenmusicprofessormadeastrikingmotionagainstPsbackduringapianolessonatPshome.
Contactcausedharm.Psaidshewouldnothaveconsentedtothiskindoftouch=offensive
2. Issue:Didhehaveimpliedlicensetotouchher?
3. Rule:Ifyouhaveintenttocontact,andthecontactisoffensive,thentheintentisoffensive.
4. Holding:Batteryresultswhenitisintendedcontactthatisfoundtobeoffensive.
Touchcanoccurdirectlyorindirect
i. Direct:AhitsB
ii. Indirect:Hypo:5yearoldboy

3
1.

c.

d.

ApullsoutchairintentionallyfromB,Bfallsandisinjured.IfAcanbefoundtobesubstantiallycertainthat
Bsfallwouldcausecontact,thenAisliableforbatterytoB.
Minimumrequirements
i. Anythingofparticularmattercapableofmakingphysicalcontactandofoffendingareasonablesenseofpersonaldignitycan
beconsideredcontact
ii. Leichtmanv.WLWJacorCommunications
1. Facts:DintentionallyblowssmokeinPsfaceduringaradiointerview.Pinterviewedasanantismokingadvocate.
2. Rule:YoudonthavetophysicallytouchP.Ifyoumanipulatesomethingtointentionallycomeintocontactwiththe
person,youareliableforbattery.
3. Holding:Ifyoumanipulateparticularmattercapableofmakingphysicalcontactandoffendingareasonablesense
ofpersonaldignity,couldbeliableforbattery.
iii. Maddenv.D.C.TransitSystem,INC.
1. Facts:PwitnessedDpermittingfumes&oiltospewfromthebus
2. Holding:Absentashowingofmalice,willfulness,orspecificwrongfulintent,theDcantbeheldliablefortheacts
alleged.Theywerentabletocontroltheemissions,NL
iv. ItisnotnecessarytotouchthePsbody,orevenclothing.Knocking,snatching,touching,etc.anythingconnectedwiththe
Pspersoncanbeenoughforcontactinbattery.
v. Morganv.Loyacomo
1. Facts:DfollowedPoutofstore&snatchedPsbagsaccusingheroftheft.Pstolenothing.
2. Rule:Youdonthavetophysicallytouch.
3. Holding:Merchantmayusereasonableforcetoretrievestolengoods,butifheiswrong,liableforbattery.
CrowdedWorldDoctrine
i. Inacrowdedworld,acertainamountofcontactisinevitableandmustbeaccepted.Consentisassumedtoallthoseordinary
contactswhicharecustomaryandreasonablynecessarytothecommonintercourseoflife.
ii. Wallacev.Rosen
1. Facts:Firedrillatschool.Pwasinstairwell.Dteacheraskedhertomoveandslightlytouchedher.Pfell.
2. Rule:Circumstancesandrelationwillaffectwhetherthetouchingwasoffensivetoanordinaryperson,notunduly
sensitiveastopersonaldignity.
3. Holding:Ifthecircumstanceispartofacrowdedworld,thentheoffenderwillbeNL

10. NOCONSENTOFVICTIM/3RDPARTY
a.

b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

g.

Restatement892MeaningofConsent
i. Consentiswillingnessinfactforconducttooccur.Itmaybemanifestedbyactionorinactionandneednotbecommunicated
totheactor.
ii. Ifwordsorconductarereasonablyunderstoodbyanothertobeintendedasconsent,theyconstituteapparentconsentandareas
effectiveasconsentinfact.
1. Evenifthepersondoesnotinfactagreetotheconductoftheother,hiswordsoractsorevenhisinactionmay
manifestaconsentthatwilljustifytheotherinactinginrelianceuponthem
IMPLIEDdoesntmatterifPconsents,ifaREASONABLEPERSONcouldinferthatconsentwasimpliedinPsactions,NL
EXPRESSPwillinglyconsentstoDsconduct
CONSENTINFACTfactpatternleadsyoutobelievethereisconsentwillingnessforconducttooccur
i. Manifestedinaction,andinaction,andneednotbecommunicated)
CONSENTIMPLIEDINLAWsimilarfactpatternestablishedincommonlawprecedenttoshowconsent
i. Legalrulethatjurycantchangemedtreatmentnecessarytosavelife(eg)
CONSENTIsanaffirmativedefensetobattery
i. DmustprovethatP
1. GavepermissiontotheactAND
2. Theconsentwasknowing
ii. RULE:whentheresambiguityastopatientswishesofconsentsavinglifewillprevail
MedicalConsent
i. Mohrv.Williams
1. Facts:P(patient)consentstoD(doctor)forsurgeryonherrightearinanonemergencysituation.Doperatesonleft
ear,determiningittoneedsurgerymore.
2. Issue:doesconsenttooperateononebodypartserveasconsenttooperateonotherbodyparts
3. Rule:Asurgeonmusthaveexpressconsentonthepreciseareathatistobeoperatedupon
4. Holding:Whenconsentforanoperationisnotgiven,andemergencydoesnotexist,consenttodeviatefromoriginal
operationismandatoryinordertoescapeliability
a. Whenlifeorlimbisatstakeconsentisautomaticallyimpliedbylaw
ii. Grabowskiv.Quigley
1. Facts:PwentunderforsurgerytobeperformedbyD.Anotherdoctordidthesurgery.
2. Holding:Whenthepatientisabletomentally/physicallyconsultabouthiscondition,inabsenceofanemergency,the
expressconsentofthepatientisaprereqtoasurgicaloperationbyhisphysician.
iii. Brzoskav.Olson

h.

i.

j.

1. Facts:DwasadentistwithHIV.Didnottellhisconditiontohispatients.
2. Holding:Dtouchedhispatientsinexactlythewaytheyconsented
3. ReasonablePersonTest:Areasonablepersonwouldnotfindthistouchoffensive.
Religionandmedicalconsent
i. Ifapersonspecificallystatesthattheirreligionprohibitsacertaincontact,andthecontactiseasilyavoidablepossible
battery.
ii. Cohenv.Smith
1. Facts:P(patient)toldtheD(doctor)andhospitalthatherreligionforbidherfrombeingseenunclothedbymen.Male
nursesawandtouchedPwhilenakedanyway.
2. Rule:IfArequestsacontactNOTtooccurandBcausescontactanyway,BisliabletoAforbatteryaslongasits
NOTanemergencysituation(itwaseasilyavoidablehere.
3. Holding:IfPinformDofreligiousbeliefs,andDpersistsintreatingPastheywouldhavetreatedapatientwithout
thosebeliefs,thenDisliableforbattery.
iii. Impliedconsentdistinction
iv. Werthv.Taylor
1. Facts:P,aJehovahsWitnesssignedarefusalfortransfusion.Psuedafteradoctorperformedalifesaving
transfusionwhileunconscious.
2. Rule:Lawimpliesconsentofanunconsciouspatientinmedicalproceduresneededtopreservethepatientslife.
a. Herpriorrefusalshadnotbeenmadewhenitappearedthatdeathwasadefinitepossibilityiftransfusion
weregivensoherrefusalswerenotinformed
3. Holding:Consentisimpliedwhentheresanemergencyprocedureandtheresnoopportunitytoobtainactual
consent.
ConsenttoaCrime
i. Ifyouconsentandareparticipatinginacrime,youcantrecoverfrombattery
ii. Restatement892cConsenttoacrime
1. Exceptasstatedin(2),consentiseffectivetobarrecoveryintortactionalthoughtheconductconsentedtoisacrime.
2. Ifconductismadecriminalinordertoprotectacertainclassofpersonsirrespectiveoftheirconsent,theconsentof
membersofthatclasstotheconductisnoteffectivetobaratortaction.
iii. Hartv.Geysel
1. Facts:PandDconsenttoengageinillegalprizefighting.Pdies.NoRecovery
2. Rule:NLCannotclaimbatteryafterconsentingtoillegalactdoneforsport.Nomanshallprofitfromhisown
wrongdoing.Psownconsentbarshisrecovery
3. Holding:Iftheactisunlawful,consentisadefense;recoveryisbarred.
iv. **Exception:iftheinvasionisinapublicrightofway,recoveryisnotbarredfromeitherparty:
v. McNeilv.Mullin
1. Facts:PandD,afterbuggyroadragegetintoafight.PsuesDforinjuries.Recoveryallowed.
2. Ruling:Lbreachofpeacedoneinpublic,whichbarsbothfromclaimingtheotherconsented
3. Holding:Ifthelawbrokenisabreachofpeace,consentnotadefense;andrecoveryisallowed.
4. PP:Thepublicisaninnocent3rdpartythatneedsprotection.
Intoxicationcannegateconsentnoabilitytorationalize
i. Hollerudv.Malamis
1. Facts:PisdrunkatDsbarandbartenderarmwrestleshim.Psuedforinjuries.
2. Rule:Intoxicationisenoughtonegateconsent.
3. Holding:IfP,admittingintoxication,isincapableofexpressingarationalwill,andtheDknowshesdrunk,the
consentisineffective.
ii. SubstantialCertaintyistheminimallevelofintent.
1. Hypo:AisonthestreetandmeetsB,whohasbeendrinkingallnight.AasksBtoarmwrestle,unknowingthatB
hasbeendrinking.Bsuedforinjuries.AnotliabletoB.

Assault
11.

Elements:

a. INTENT
b. TOCONTACTORCAUSEIMMINENTAPPREHENSIONOFCONTACT
c. CAUSESVICTIMIMMINENTAPPREHENSIONOFDANGEROUSCONTACT

12.

Rest2nd21Assault
a.Anactorissubjecttoliabilitytoanotherforassaultif
b.Heactsintendingtocausecontactwhichisharmfuloroffensivewiththepersonoftheotherora3rdparty,oranimminentapprehension
ofsuchacontact,AND
c.Theotheristherebyputinsuchimminentapprehension.

d.Anactionwhichisnotdonewiththeintentionstatedin(1)(a)doesntmaketheactorliabletotheotherforanapprehensioncaused
therebyalthoughtheactinvolvesanunreasonableriskofcausingit,and,therefore,wouldbenegligentorrecklessiftheriskthreatened
bodilyharm.
13.22.AttemptUnknowntoOther
a.A,standingbehindB,pointapistolathim.CoverpowersAbeforehecanshoot.B,hearingthenoiseturnsaroundandrealizesthe
dangerhesin.AisnotliabletoB.
14.28.ApprehensionofUnintendedBodilyContact
a.Iftheactorintendsmerelytoputtheotherinapprehensionofabodilycontact,heissubjecttoliabilityforanassaulttotheotherifthe
other,althoughrealizingthattheactordoesntintendtoinflictcontact,isputinapprehensionofthecontact.
15.32.CharacterofIntentNecessary
a.Tomaketheactorliableforassault,theactormusthaveintendedtoinflictharmful/offensivecontactupontheotherortohaveputthe
otherinapprehensionofsuchcontact.
b.Ifanactisdonewiththeintentionofaffectinga3rdpersoninthemannerstatedin(1),butputsanotherinapprehensionof
harmful/offensivecontact,theactorissubjecttoliabilitytosuchotherasfullyasthoughheintendedsotoaffecthim.

16. INTENT
a.

b.
c.

Ifactorintendsbatterbutfails,itcouldstillbeassault
i. TransferredIntentDoctrine!
TIDoctrinealsoholdsDliableforassaultofathirdparty
i. AintendstoputBinimminentapprehension,butscaresCinstead.AisliabletoCforassault
ii. AintendstocontactB,butputsCinimminentapprehension.AisliabletoC
Newellv.Whitcher(problem)
i. Pianoteacherstaysnightatstudentshouse.Dadcameontoherinthemiddleofthenight.Shestayedupsickwithfright
ii. Dclaimedhedidntcauseharmorapprehensionofharm

17. IMMINENTAPPREHENSION
a.

b.
c.

a.
b.
c.
d.

Theintentmustbetocauseimmediatefearofcontacttooccurintheverynearfuture.
i. Browerv.Ackerly
1. Facts:PhatedbillboardsthatDswereputtingupandgotthecitytodeclarethemillegal.Preceivedthreateningcalls
fromDsandsuedforassault.
2. Rule:Theapprehensioncreatedmustbeoneofimminentharm/contact,asdistinguishedfromanycontactinthe
future.
3. Holding:DmustbestandingoutsidePshouseorbeinsomeotherwayvisiblycausingimminentapprehensionfor
theassaulttooccur.Notenoughthatfearisofafutureevent.
Thisdoesntmeanyouhavetofearthepersoncommittingtheassault.Youjusthavetobelievethecontactisgoingtooccur.
Conditionalthreatisnotimmediate!
i. Tubervillev.Savage
1. Facts:Ifitwerenotassizetime,Iwouldnottakesuchlanguagefromyou.(allegedassault)
2. Rule:Theintentionaswellastheactmakesanassault.
a. Psaidhewouldnotassaultbcthejudgeswereintown,sohehadnointentionatthistime
Threatsoffuturecontractinsufficient!
Distoofarawaytodoharminsufficient!
Merewordsaretypicallynotenoughtoconstituteassault.
AssaultRestatementrevisionbywilson:
a. Anactorissubjecttoliabilitytoanotherforassaultif
i. heactsintendingtocauseacontactwhichisaharmfuloroffensivecontactwiththepersonoftheotherorathird
person,oranimminentapprehensionofsuchcontact
3. Ifyouplantotouchharmfullyoroffensivelybutdon't,andpersonisscaredorinimminentapprehension,anassault
hasprobablyoccurred
4. PlaintiffALWAYShastobeawareofwhatsgoingon.imminentapprehension
5. AwarenessisNOTrequiredforbattery
6. AwarenessORharmisrequiredforfalseimprisonment
7. Asapracticalmatterassaultrequiresrealfeartheheavyweightchampnotbeingscaredisnolongervalidincourt

18. VICTIMSAWARENESS
a.

b.
c.
d.

VictimMUSTbeawareandapprehensiveofimmediatecontact
i. Ex.AissleepingandBtriestoscareA.BNOTliableforassault
ThereMUSTbesubstantialcertaintythecontactwilloccurimmediately
i. IfAtellsB,Ifyourmomwasnthere,Idkillyou,AisNOTliable.
ii. IfAtellsB,Imgoingtokillyoutomorrow,AisNOTliable
Thisisbasedonreasonablepersonstandard.
IfDhasknowledgePwontbehurt,butPcannotmakethedistinction,Disstillliable.
i. Landfordv.ShuEggshellPlaintiff
1. Mongooseprank.Praninfearandwashurt.
2. Dwasliablethoughitwasjustachildsprank

FalseImprisonment

19.Elements:
a.DINTENTIONALLY
i. Byactsorthreats
ii. Intentstoconfine,doesnthavetobeintenttoharm
iii. Intenttransfers
b.CAUSESPTOBETOTALLYCONFINED
i. Orlacktheabilitytomovesoastoleavetheplace
ii. Foranunreasonableamountoftime,withnolegalmeansofescape,withoutconsentorlegaljustificationAND
c.ANDPISAWAREOFCONFINEMENT
i. CannotbeunconsciousOR
ii. Pmustbeharmed
20. Restatement
a. 35.FalseImprisonment
i. Anactorissubjecttoliabilitytoanotherforfalseimprisonmentif
1. Heactsintendingtoconfinetheotherora3rdpersonwithinboundariesfixedbytheactor,and
2. Hisactdirectlyorindirectlyresultsinsuchaconfinementoftheother,and
3. Theotherisconsciousoftheconfineorisharmedbyit.
ii. anactwhichisnotdonewiththeintentionstatedabovedoesnotmaketheactorliabletotheotherforamerelytransitoryor
otherwiseharmlessconfinement,althoughtheactinvolvesanunreasonableriskofimposingitandthereforewoldbenegligent
orrecklessiftheriskthreatenedbodilyharm
b. 36.WhatConstitutesConfinement
i. Tomaketheactorliableforf.i,theothersconfinementwithintheboundariesfixedbytheactormustbecomplete.
ii. Theconfinementiscompletealthoughthereisareasonablemeansofescape,unlesstheotherknowsofit.
iii. Theactordoesntbecomeliableforf.i.byintentionallypreventinganotherfromgoinginaparticulardirectioninwhichhehas
aright/privilegetogo.
c. Confinementbyphysicalbarriers
i. Theconfinementmaybeactualorapparentphysicalbarriers
21.Directv.indirct
a.indirect:lockingdoortoroom
b.direct:destroyingmeansofescapeor:ifyouleaveIllkillyourfamily(implicitindirectthreatoffamily)
22.MusthaveIntent:
a.Ifactisdonewithnointent,notFIpossiblynegligence
i. Lockedworkerincooler
b.Transferredintent:
i. MeantotrapB,buttrapC,liableforFI
23. Classexamples
a. Futurethreatisnotenough!
b. CanhappenwhenDtakesPspropertycantleavewithoutyourwallet
c. ReasonablemeansofescapedoesnotmeanDhastogiveupvaluableinordertoexitwallet
d. Boundariescanbeinvisibledontleavethisspot(withguntohead)
e. Whatkindofescapeisreasonable
i. JustonereasonablewaytoescapeisnotFI
ii. Exitmustbeknownorwellknown
iii. ExitcantexposePtoharm,personalthereatofharm,harmofpersonalproperty
iv. Cantleadtoapotentialsourceofdanger
v. Placeofexitmustnotcauseembarrassment,aplaceofreasonablediscomfort(evenifnolastingconsequence)orrequirehimto
beheroic
f. NotFItodenysomeonetogosomewheredontgotoMcDonalds
g. SpecifiedSpaceorUnabletoMove
i. 38.ConfinementbyPhysicalBarriers.Theconfinementmaybebyactualorapparentphysicalbarriers.
ii. Pointingagunatsomeoneandsaying,Dontmove!isFIeventhoughboundariesareinvisible.
iii. Takingawaysomeonescrutches/wheelchairisFIbecausetheyareunabletomove
h. Hypos
i. Inamovingcar?Yes
ii. Ifallexitsareblocked,exceptforone?No
iii.Ifmeansofescapeisthroughasewer?Yes
i.Privilegeforshopliftingdetentions
i.Theremustbeareasonablebeliefastothefactoftheft
ii.Detentionmustbeconductedinreasonablemannerandnodeadlyforce

7
24.

25.

26.

iii.Detentionmustbeonlyforareasonableperiodoftime,onlyforpurposeofmakinginvestigation
CitizensArrests
a. Citizensarrestisallowedinmostjurisdictionsstillif
i. Itsafelony
ii. Thepersonisreleasedimmediatelyafterarrest
iii. Thepersonisreallyguilty
iv. Itistheactualfactofthefelonythatmakesanarrestok,notthebeliefofguilt
b. aprivatepersonmaymakeanarrestwhen
i. forafelonycommittedintheprivatepersonspresence
ii. ifthepersontobearrestedhascommittedafelonyalthoughnotintheprivateperson'spresence
iii. iftheprivatepersonissummonedbyapeaceofficertoassisttheofficerinmakinganarrest
c. iftheprivatepersonisamerchant,anagentofamerchant,anemployeeofamerchant,oranindependentcontractorprovidingsecurity
foramerchantofastoreandhasreasonablecausetobelievethatthepersontobearrestedhas
d. Brightv.AilshieMistakenIdentity
i. Facts:Arrestedthewrongbrotheronaccident.
ii. Rule:Inordertomakeacitizensarrest,theremustbeanactualfelony.Itcantbeonlyprobablecause.
iii. Holding:Evenifthepersonreasonablybelieveshesarrestingthefelon,ifheiswrong,hesliable.
e. Baggettv.BankGoodFaithMistake
i. Facts:Bankstekup.Dactedingoodfaith.
ii. Holding:AwillnotbeheldliableforFIaslongashefollowsthedueprocessofthelawanddoesnotdetainBforan
unreasonableamountoftime.Thedecisionwasmadesolelybypolice,basedonemployeesaccurateandgoodfaithaccountof
whathappened
CitizensArrestvs.LawEnforcement
a. CAlikeSL:ifyoudecidetoplacesomeoneunderarrestandyourewrong,LforFI
b. Lawenforcementofficernotliableaslongas
i. Followsdueprocessand
ii. Doesntdetainforunreasonableamountoftime
c. PPRationale:
i. Wantcitizenstobeverycarefulwhenmakingacitizensarrest.Dontwantpeoplerunningaroundarrestingpeoplewrongfully
ii. Officersthisisahugepartoftheirjob.Dontwanttooverdeterarrest,cantexposetothismuchliability
d. Rest45A.InstigatingorParticipatinginFalseImprisonment
i. Onewhoinstigatesorparticipatesintheunlawfulconfinementofanotherissubjecttoliabilitytotheotherforf.i.
e. Meltonv.LaCalamito
i. Facts:Uhaul.Dspersuasionwasthedeterminingfactorinpolicemakingthearrest.
ii. Rule:Ifapersonpersuasionisthesoledeterminingfactorofpolicemakingarrest,oriftheyknowinglygivefalsetestimony,
andsoundulyinfluenceauthority,theycanbeheldliableforFI.
iii. Holding:SubjecttoLforFIifAinstigatesorparticipatesinthefalsearrestofB.
Deprogramming
a. TotalconfinementforsomereasonableperiodoftimewithinboundariesestablishedbyDwithnoreasonablemeansofescape
b. Petersonv.Sorlien
i. Facts:Psparentspickedherupfromcollegeandtookhertoadeprogrammeraftercultlikebehavior.Pisuncooperativefor3
days,thencomplies.After2weeksflaggedacopandaskedtobetakenbacktotheministry
ii. Holding:Whenparents,assumingthejudgmentalcapacityoftheiradultchildisimpaired,seektotakechildawayfromwhat
theyreasonablybelievetobeacult,andthechildatsomepointassentstotheactionsinquestion,limitationsuponthechilds
mobilitydonotconstitutemeaningfuldeprivationsofpersonallibertysufficienttosupportajudgmentforfalseimprisonment
iii. PP:Wantparentstobeabletoprotecttheirchildren.
iv. Dissent:Adultchildisnolongerachild.Heisfreetomakedecisionsashechooses.
c. Musthave
i. Parents/agentsofparents
ii. Impairedjudgment
iii. Reasonablebeliefofparentsofcult
iv. Childassentsatapoint
d. Eilersv.Coy
i. Facts:Pwastakentobedeprogrammed.Pwashandcuffedandfakedcooperationinordertoescape.
ii. Holding:DistinguishablefromPetersonbecauseconditionswereextreme.Pwasunusuallyrestrainedandconstantlyobjected.
Also,parentshireddeprogrammerstogethim.

Trepass
27.

Elements:
a. Intentionally
5. Enterslandinpossessionofother,or
6. Causesathingorpersontodoso,or

8
7. Remainsontheland,or
8. Failstoremovefromthelandathingwhichheisunderdutytoremove
28.Restatement
a.158.LiabilityforIntentionalIntrusionsonLand
i. Oneissubjecttoliabilitytoanotherfortrespass,irrespectiveofwhetherhetherebycausesharmtoanylegallyprotected
interestoftheother,ifheintentionally
1.Enterslandinthepossessionoftheother,orcausesathingor3rdpersontodoso
2.Remainsontheland,or
3.Failstoremovefromthelandathing,whichheisunderdutytoremove.
29.Entryontoland
a.Trespassv.Nuisance
i. ViolatesexclusivecontroloflandTrespass
ii. Violatesuseandenjoymentoflandnuisance(pollution,noise)
30. ConsenttoUse
a.168.ConditionalorRestrictedConsent
i. Aconditionalorrestrictedconsenttoenterlandcreatesaprivilegetodosoonlyinsofarasthecondition/restrictionis
compliedwith.
b.Consentmaybelimitedby:
i. Consenttoenterononeoccasion
ii. Foronepurpose
iii. Foracertainamountoftime

31.

32.

c.
Noimpliedconsentunderfalsepretensesmisrepresentationcannegateconsentwhenpropertyownerisdeceived
i. Moreforprivatepropertyownerthanbusinessesopentopublic
ii. Ifbusinessisenteredinfalsepretenses,buttheirbusinessisnotdisrupted=NLfortrespass
iii. Desnickv.ABC
1. Facts:DsentinreportersundercoverintoPseyecentertoinvestigate.
2. Issue:Whenanindividualgainsentrancethroughfalsepretenses;aretheyliablefortrespass?
3. Rule:Interestsprotectedbytrespassmustbeviolatedtomakeittrespasswhenoneentersyourland.
4. Holding:Insomecircumstances,wheretheresfraud,theresnottrespass.Pdidnothingoutoftheordinaryofwhata
normalpatientwoulddo.Didntputcamerasinbroom,stealtradesecretsetc.
iv. PP:Foodcriticneedstobediscreet,secretshopper
IntrusionsbyAccident(NL)vs.Mistake(L)
a. 166.NonLiabilityforAccidentalIntrusions
i. Exceptwheretheactorisengagedinanabnormallydangerousactivity,anunintentionalandnonnegligententryonlandinthe
possessionofanother,orcausingathingor3rdpersontoentertheland,doesntsubjecttheactortoliability,eventhoughthe
entrycausesharmtotheowner.
b. 164.IntrusionsUnderMistake
i. Onewhointentionallyenterslandinthepossessionofanotherissubjecttoliabilitytothepossessorofthelandasatrespasser,
althoughheactsundermistakenbeliefoflaworfact,howeverreasonable,notinducedbytheconductofthepossessor,thathe
1. Isinpossessionofthelandorentitledtoit,or
2. Hastheconsentofthepossessororofa3rdpersonwhohasthepowertogiveconsentonthepossessorsbehalf,or
3. Hassomeotherprivilegetoenterorremainontheland
c. Test:didyouintenttogoontoland
i. Yesifyouremistakenandthinklandsyours,trespass
ii. Exceptifyoureinadangeroussituation/activity,andtheresnointenttoenterland,NOtrespass
1. Tripandfall
2. Chasedbymanwithgun/dog
d. 159
i. Thelandextendsintotheairaboveandthegroundbelowyourproperty(immediateairspaceaboveandcavesbelowyour
landareyours)
1. Cantbarplanesfromflyingabovehome,butgenerallyhaverighttolandunderandcertainamtairspace
ii. Edwardsv.Lee
1. Facts:Pfindsanopeningtocave.turnsthecaveintoatouristtrap.PartofcaveunderDsestate
2. Holding:Owneroflandisentitledtothefree,unfetteredcontrolofhisownlandabove,upon,andbeneaththe
surface.
iii. Smithv.Aircraft
1. Facts:DfliesaloudplanerepeatedlyoverPsproperty..
2. Rule:Youonlyownacertainspaceofairaboveyourland.Butyouownthelandbelowandaboveyourlandwithin
reasonablespace

iv. Garretv.Daleymissingnotes?Substantialcertaintythatpullingthechairout

ThingorThirdPerson

a.
b.

c.

IfyoucauseaTHINGor3rdpersontotrespass,youreliable
Peggv.Gray
i. Facts:HuntingdogswereallowedtorunontoPsproperty,causingthelivestocktostampede.
ii. Holding:IfyourerecklessinallowingyouranimalstorepeatedlygoontootherspropertyForthepurposeofsportrelease

animalswithactualorconstructiveknowledgethattheywillgoonotherlandsinpursuitofgameL
Unintentional
i. Maloufv.DallasAthleticClub
1. Facts:Plivesbycourseandstraygolfsballdamagecar
2. Issue:Doesaccidentallyhittingagolfballontosomeonespropertyconstitutetrespass?
3. Holding:Youmusthavetherequisiteintenttotrespasstobeguiltyofit.Iftheyintendedtohittheballsthereit
wouldbedifferent

TrespasstoChattel
33.

34.

Rest2nd217.WaysofCommittingTrespasstoChattels
a. Actorisliableifheintentionally:
i. Dispossessesanotherofthechattel;or
ii. Usesorintermeddleswithachattelpossessedbyanother
218.LiabilitytoPersoninPossession
a. Onewhocommitsatrespasstochattelisliableif,butonlyif:
i. Hedispossesstheotherofthechattel,or
ii. Thechattelisimpairedastoitscondition,quality,orvalue;or
iii. Thepossessorisdeprivedoftheuseofthechattelforasubstantialtime,or
iv. Bodilyharmiscausedtothepossessor,orharmiscausedtosomepersonorthinginwhichthepossessorhasalegally
protectedinterest.
b. TrespassisalessertortthanConversion.Itisnotatotallossoftheproperty.
c. Ex.Trespassiskeyingacar??
d. Ex.Conversionistakingasledgehammertoacar.

Conversionciviltheft(usuallydatanowadays

DstolePsgoods:Pisentitledtorecoverdamages
ButalsointerestingsituationwhereDhasexertedcontorlvoverpropertythatfallsshortofthiftbutisinconsistentwithPsrightofownership
35.222A.WhatConstitutesConversion
a.Conversionisanintentionalexerciseofdominion/controloverachattelwhichsoseriouslyinterfereswiththerightofanothertocontrol
itthattheactormaybejustlyrequiredtopaytheotherthefullvalueofthechattel
b.Indeterminingtheseriousnessoftheinterferenceandthejusticeofrequiringtheactortopaythefullvalue,thefollowingfactorsare
important:
i. Theextentanddurationoftheactorsexerciseofdominionandcontrol
ii. Theactorsintenttoassertarightinfactinconsistentwiththeothersrightofcontrol
iii. Theactorsgoodfaith
iv. Theextentanddurationoftheresultinginterferencewiththeothersrightofcontrol
v. Theharmdonetothechattel
vi. Theinconvenienceandexpensecausedtotheother
36. 226.ConversionbyDestructionorAlteration
a. Onewhointentionallydestroysachattelorsomateriallyaltersitsphysicalconditionastochangeitsidentityorcharacterissubjectto
liabilityforconversiontoanotherwhoisinpossessionofthechattelorentitledtoitsimmediatepossession.
37. ActsofConversion(seekingdamages,notreturnofproperty)
a. Wrongfulacquisition
i. Theft,embezzlement
b. Wrongfultransfer
i. Selling,misdelivering
c. Wrongfuldetermtion
i. Refusingtoreturntoowner
d. Severelydamaging/destroying
e. Substantiallychanging
f. Misusingthechattel
g. ReplevinPwantspropertyreturnedinsteadofdamages
38. Illustrations
a. AmistakenlytakesBshatfromrackthinkingitshis.Walksoutside,realizesmistake,returnstorackNOTCONVERSION
b. Same,butAhashatfor3monthsbeforerealizingCONVERSION
c. Same,buthatisblownoffheadandlostCONVERSION
d. AtakesBshatintendingtostealit.SeesapolicemanandreturnsitCONVERSION

10
39.

40.

IntenttoExerciseDominion
a. RusselFordv.Rouse
i. Facts:DwithheldPskeysfromhimjusttoseehimcryPcalledcops.
ii. Holding:therefusal,withoutlegalexcuse,todeliverachattel,constitutesaconversion.itsenoughthatthatDexercised
dominionoveritinexclusionandPdefied.DsexceededPsscopeofpermissionoftheuseofhiskeys
iii. Notes:DsaidPdidntexhaustallpossibleoptionstogetpropertyback
1. Caselawdoesrequirethis
iv. PP:Nottypicalconversionbutcourtwantstosendasignal(deterrence)
ConversionbyDestruction/Alteration
a. Spoonerv.Manchester
i. Facts:DhadacontracttoborrowPshorse.D,ingoodfaith,gotlost,forcedtotakealongerrouteback,makinghorselame.
ii. Rule:Ifthepersonhadnointenttogoagainstscopeofpermission,getlost,orbreakKthenheisnotliable.
b. Palmerv.Mayo
i. Facts:PrentscarriagetoDwholendsittoafamilymemberwhodestroysitwhiledrunk.
ii. Rule:Youmaynotexceedthescopeofpermission.
iii. Holding:Whencontracting/borrowinganitemfromanother,andyouuseitoutsidescopeofpermission,orletothersuseit
whenitsnotauthorized(expressorimplied)byK,youareliable.
iv. PermissiondoesnttransferunlessitwasagreeduponbeforeconsentfromD
v. PP:wewanttodeterpeoplefrompassingpropertyalong,protectingwhatwasloanedtothem
c. Differencebetweenthetwocases:
i. Spoonerneverusedthepropertyinconsistentwiththeconsentgiven.
ii. Palmergavepropertytosomeonewhowasnotpartoftheconsentgiven.

Privileges
41.

PrivilegesDcanuse
a. Defenseofpersonandproperty
i. Useleastamountofforcenecessarylookatthreatattackeruses
ii. Whatsreasonableundercircumstances?forfactfinder
b. Necessitypublicandprivate

DefenseofPersonorProperty
42.85:HumanLifeOutweighsProperty
a.Thevalueofhumanlifeandlimb,notonlytotheindividualconcernedbutalsotosociety,sooutweighstheinterestofapossessorofland
inexcludingfromitthosewhomheisnotwillingtoadmittheretothataownerhas,asstatedin79,noprivilegetouseforce
intended/likelytocausedeath/seriousharmagainstintruder.
43.79:Nodeadlyforcemaybeusedunlessabsolutelynecessary(matchforcewithforce)
44. ProtectionofPropertyv.Humanlife
a. Youcantuseadevicethat,inyourabsenceaccomplishesthatyouwouldhavedoneinpersontodefendmereproperty
b. Katkov.BrineySPRINGGUN
i. Issue:Canyouuseaspringgun(deadlyforce)inhousefordefensivepurposes?
ii. Rule:valueofhumanlifeandlimbfaroutweighsadefenseofproperty
iii. Reasoning:cantputahumanlifeatriskunlessyourepersonallythreatened/present.Theftnotmoreimptthanlife/limb
iv. PP:humansafetyisofhighervaluethanrightstoproperty
1. LandownerisLforinjuriestoathief(ifthiefisnotthreateningwithdeadlyforceandlandownerusesdeadlyforce
c. Springguns/mechanicaldevicewhoseonlypurposeistoinflictdeathorseriousharmuponintruders:
i. CantGivewarning(dogcanbark)
ii. CantDiscriminatebetweenthief/manandchild/firefighter
iii. Cantdefendagainst
iv. Hugescopeofdanger
d. CalibratedMeasures
i. Propertyownerscanonlyuseminimumforcenecessarytotrespassersandthieves
ii. Useonlywordsandgentlyusheringthemoffpropertyotherwisecanbeatruebattery?
45. ReasonablePersonStandard
a. Theforceusedmustbewhatareasonablepersonwoulddecidetopreventharm(attimeofattack)
b. Crabtreev.Dawson
i. Facts:Manthrowsaparty,thoughtguywascomingupstairstoattackhim.Hestruckmanthatwasntattacker
ii. Rule:Youmaydefendattackwithjustenoughforcethatisnecessaryevenifyouremistaken!howmuchforcewouldthe
reasonablepersonuse.Wasattacknecessaryforselfdefense.
iii. Holding:youcandefendselfwithjustenoughnecessaryforce,butexerciseextremecaution.Appliesevenifyoumistake
personyouattackyoujusthavetobelieveitwasthem,andtheattackwasnecessary

iv.

46.

47.

48.

49.

11

RuleDoctrine:juryhastofindyouusedminforcenecessarytowardoffattackUSEupmostcare.Juryisreasonable
person
UseofFirearmstoProtectProperty
a. Wrightv.Haffke
i. Facts:Storeownerwasassaulted,knockeddownshotrobberintheback
ii. Issue:Isitpermissibletousedeadlyforceindefenseofproperty
iii. Rule:useoffirearmtoprotecttheftofpropertyisnotexcessiveasamatteroflaw,butcouldbeasamatteroffact
iv. Holding:NL.Whenafirearmisused,alwayslooktowhetherforcewasunreasonableinthecircumstance
v. Note:usuallygunsareonlyreasonableinthecommissionofafelony.Personhastobepresent!(nospringguns)
1. Threatofhumanlifeisrequired
vi. STANDARD(everevolving)nothardandfastrule
vii. Maj:cantuseagunfortrespassonpersonalproperty,unlessitsyourhouse
viii. Min:youcanusedeadlyforceforpersonalproperty,justhastobereasonable
UseofDogstoprotectProperty
a. Woodbridgev.Marks
i. Facts:Dhashisviscousdogschainedsotheycouldntreachpeopleonsidewalk.Pgoesoffsidewalk,meandogsattack
ii. Issue:whetheradogmaybelawfullyusedtodefendproperty
iii. Holding:nowunlawful,butownercanbeliableifdogwasinappropriatelykept
1. Mustkeepdoginreasonablefashion
2. IfpersoncomestopropertyandignoresdogswarningsNL
b. PPDogsv.Springguns
i. Dogsgivewarning,makedistinctionbetweenintruderandchild,firearmharmisgreaterthandog,dogscanberestricted
(chained,fenced),dogsareheardandseeninadvance,easiertodefendagainst
c. GeneralRuleforanimalcases:
i. Owneroflivestockhasrighttokeepthelivestockoutoftheharmofothers
d. Hullv.Scruggs
i. Facts:eggsuckingdog.Dshootsdog
ii. Holding:ifownermakesareasonableefforttodeteranimalfromtrespassing,NLforkilling.3thingshedidmadeitpermissble
1. Drivedogaway
2. Trytocatch,confine,dealwithit
3. Talktotheowners
ValueofAnimals
a. Animalsarechattelandthelivelihoodformany.Therefore,itsreasonabletotakemeasurestoprotectthemfromharmoftrespassers
b. Courtlooktoananimalsvalueversus
c. Kershawv.McKownNL
i. Facts:PsdogattackedDsgoatforsometime,soDshotdog
ii. Holding:fordomesticanimalsattackingotheranimalsthejurycanlookattherelativevalueoftheanimalstoconsiderwhether
defenseofkillingwasunreasonableinacertaincircumstance
d. SingleOwnerPrinciple:LookatitasifPownedbothanimals/property.Whichmakesmoresensetokill
i. Makessuretherearentinsufficienciesandinequities
ii. Thisisonlytodecidereasonablenessofactions
iii. Eg:eggsuckingdogandchickencasechickensmakehimalotofmoney
e. Hypo:hogwork50,chickensworth.50.DwouldbeLifhekilledahogwhowasthreateningchicken
DutytoRetreatinSelfDefense
a. Retreattherearemorestringentrulestowhatyoumustdowhenyouarefacedwithdeadlyforcebeforeyouareallowedtodefend
yourself
i. Beforeyoureturndeadlyforcewithdeadlyforce,wewanttomakesurethatyouhaventmadeamistake
ii. Whenyouarefacedwithnondeadlyforce,thereisagreementthatyouarenotobligedtoretreat(withreasonableormatching
force)
iii. Thereisdisagreementwhereyouareallowedtoretreatfromdeadlyforce
1. Majorityruleofcommonlawyouarenotobligedtoretreatbeforerepellinganattack.Why
a. Retreatcouldexposeyoutogreaterharm
2. Majorityruleofrestatementyoumustretreatbeforeusingdeadlyforce.Makesomeeffortatretreatingifyoucan
dososafely
a. BUTnotinyourhome.Why?Whatsspecialaboutityouwouldhavetoretreattooutsidewhichwould
subjectyoutoevenmorechanceofharm
b. Ifyouretreatfromyouhomeyouarebasicallysurrenderingyourselfandeverythingyouown
c. Somejurisdictionstreatyourplaceofbusinesslikeahome,butnotall
b.63:SelfDefensebyForceNotThreateningDeathorSeriousBodilyHarmp.95
i. Actorsdutytoavoidforce:Theactorcantreasonablybelievethattheuseofforceisnecessaryuntilhehasexhaustedallother
reasonablysafemeansofpreventingtheotherfrominflictingbodilyharmuponhim.

12

50.

51.

ii. Actorsdutytoretreat:Theactor,ifhereasonablybelievesheisthreatenedwiththeintentionalimpositionofbodilyharm,
maystandhisgroundandrepeltheattackbytheuseofreasonableforce,whichdoesntthreatenseriousharm/death,even
thoughhemightwithabsolutecertaintyofsafetyavoidtheharmbyretreating.
iii. Inconsistencysuggestion:perhapsretreatisnotconsideredreasonablemightnotbeabletogetaway.Soturningyourback
mightexposeyoutomoredanger,makesyoumorevulnerable
c.65:SelfDefensebyForceThreateningDeathorSeriousBodilyHarmp.95
i. Apersonmayusedeadlyforcetoawaithisassailantsinhishomeevenifhecouldclosethedoor.Yourhomeisyourplaceof
safety.Butyoumustfirstavoidtheattackthroughallotherreasonablemeans.
1.YoudonthavetobeRIGHT,justhavetohaveareasonablebelief
2.Imminentharm:youcanthearsomeonebelowyourwindowandthrowavaseoutatthem
d.73:HarmfulContactinDefenseAgainstHarmThreatenedOtherwiseThanbyOtherp.96
i. Youcantpushoutsomeonetosaveyourselfinasituationwithtotalharm
ii. Ex.Ifaraftissinking,youcantpushoutyourfriendsothatyouhaveabetterchanceofsurviving.
e.76:DefenseofThirdPersonp.96
i. Youmayprotecta3rdpersonunderthesamewayyouwouldprotectyourselfifyoureasonablybelievethat
1.Thecircumstancesaresuchastogivethe3rdpersonaprivilegeofselfdefense,and
2.Hisinterventionisnecessaryfortheprotectionofthe3rdperson
ii. Ex.Achild
iii. Stillhavetouseforcewithforce
f.261:Privilegeofselfdefenseordefenseofthirdperson
i. oneisprivilegedtocommitanactwhichwouldotherwisebeatrespasstooraconversionofachattelinthepossession
ofanother,forthepurposeofdefendinghimselforathirdpersonagainsttheother,underthesameconditionswhich
wouldaffordaprivilegetoinflictaharmfuloroffensivecontactupontheotherforthesamepurpose
Defenseandrecoveryofproperty
i. Youmayusereasonableforcetorecaptureorprotectyourproperty
1. UnlikeCrabtree,youhavetoberightaboutthefactthatyourpropertyisthreatened
2. Strictliability
3. Youmayneverusedeadlyforcetoprotectmereproperty
4. Ifyoucangetsomeonetoreturnyourpropertyorgetbackwithaverbalrequestyourerequiredtodoso
b. Thegeneralruleiswhenyouseesomeonegoingintosomeoneelseshome,youmayneverusedeadlyforceunlessthereisathreatof
imminentdanger
c. Counterintuitively,yourenotpermittedtoejectsomeonefromyourhomewhoisnotthreateningyouifitwouldexposethemto
physicalinjury,eveniftheyrenotentitledtobethere
i. Youhavetopeaceablyescortthemfromyourhome
d. Atcommonlaw,onewasallowedtousephysicalforcetogetsomeoneoutoftherehome.Theyhadmorelatitude
i. Thisruleisalmostcompletelyrejectednow
e. Springgunsaregone,whataboutbarbedwirefences
i. Ruleis:youcandothis.Otherreasonabledevicesthatdontactlikeaspringgun
1. Theseareviewedasintendingtoexclude,notintendingtoharm
ProportionalForce
a. Brownv.Martinez
i. Facts:Boystrespasswithintenttostealmelons(notfelony).Dsawthemtoldthemtogetofland.Theywererunningaway,D
shotguninairwhichaccidentlyhitboybattery,Liable
ii. Reasoning:
1. Boyswerethreatening,sonofelony.Couldhavewalkedthemoffland
2. Hedidntintendharm,butintendedtofiregunimminentapprehension(assault),thatactuallyhitboysotransfersto
battery
b. Whenusingdeadlyforceconsider:
i. Valueofgoodsbeingstolen
ii. Reasonableness
iii. Whereisintruder?Onpropertyorinhome
c. Illustrations
i. AthreatensandcomesatBwithhisfist.Bcouldeasilyretreat.BstabsA.BisliabletoA.However,ifBwouldhaveputuphis
fist,BwouldnotbeliabletoAmatchforcewithforce
ii. ApointsagunatB.Theyareinawide,openarea.Bhasaknife.Bisnotrequiredtoretreat.
iii. AhasaknifeandcomestowardsB.BhasagunandpointsitatA,whothenbacksdown.BcannotshootAandclaimself
defense.
iv. AbreaksintoBshome.B,althoughhecanreasonablygetaway,candefendhimselfagainstA.

Necessity

52. PrivateNecessity
a.

b.

c.

d.

e.
f.
g.

13

Rossi

i.
ii.
iii.
iv.

Facts:girlrunsthroughfield(trespassing)becausedogwaschasingher.Shewasattackedbylandownersdog
Issue:Ispropertyownerliableifheisunawarethatpersonhethinksistrespassingisnotactuallytrespassingbcescapingharm
Holding:iftrespassingisjustifiedandyouarelandownerpreventingtrespass,youareliablefortheirharm
Doctrineofnecessity:girllawfullyonland(bcescapingthreat)Sinceshewasinjuredonhislandshenowhasaclaimfor
injuries.Thedogswerentkeptreasonablyroamingfreeonhisproperty(statutesaidifdogharmsownerliable)
TexasMidland
i. Facts:Psinstationinrainwaiting,RRagentkickedthemoutfornight,warnedshewassickly,Pgotverysickfromrain/cold
ii. Holding:Undercircumstances,youmaynotforcesomeoneoffyourpropertywhenyouknowofaconditionthatwouldcause
harmtotheindividual
Ploofv.Putnam
i. Facts:servantunmooredPsboatduringstormwherePwastryingtoescapedanger
ii. Issue:isittrespasstoremovesomeone,whoyouhaventgivenconsent,fromyourpropertyinstateofnecessity?
iii. Holding:Oneisprivilegedtoenterlandinthepossessionofanotherifitis,orreasonablyappearstobe,necessarytoprevent
seriousharmtotheactororhisproperty
1. Dhasadutytoallowtrespasswherenecessityexists.Necessityturnsrightsintoobligations.
2. Itslawfultotrespasstoprivatepropertydamages,especiallylawfulwhenoneslifeorlimbisatstake
Vincentv.LakeErie
i. Facts:Dmooredhisboattoanothersdockinastorm.Hecontinuedtoretieropes,whichcauseddamagetodock.
ii. Issue:whensomeoneavailshimselftosomeonespropertyduringastateofnecessitytosavetheirownproperty,dotheyhave
topayfordamagetheycaused?
iii. Holding:Doctrineofnecessityallowsonetomakeachoicethatislawful,andtosavehispropertyonsomeoneelsesproperty.
Butyouhavetopayfordamagesyoucaused
1. Singleownerrule:IfAownedbothboatanddock,whichwouldhesave?Whichisworthmore?yousavedexpensive
boat,goodchoice,butnowhavetocompensate
iv. Dissent:theboatownerdidnothingunlawfulheshouldnthavetopay
Hypo:boatisuntied;stormcomesupandslamsboatintodock.Dockisdamaged.BoatownerNLbcactofgod
Limitation:theremustbeasuddencircumstance,oratemporary,extremesituation(naturaldisastereg)fordocofnectoapply
LondonBorough:
i. Facts:thesquattersinhousesdidnothaveanecessitytobethere;nostormoranythingtheyneededimmediateprotection
ii. Issue:whatsthelimitofdoctrineofprivatenecessity
1. Caseshavetobeofseriousneed,
2. TEMPORARY(stormsdonthappenallofthetime,hungerisongoing/constant,alsoqualitative)also,questionof
controlofsituationyourein
3. Interestoflawandorderv.privatenecessity,
4. Fairnessissues
iii. Holding:theconditionsofthedoctrineissuddentemporaryemergencysituation.Homelessnessdoesntapply

53. PublicNecessity
a.
b.
c.
d.

e.

Thedestructorisbound,attheirperiltodecidecorrectlyastosuchanecessity
262:PrivilegeCreatedByPublicNecessity
i. Oneisprivilegedtocommitanact,whichwouldotherwisebeatrespasstochattelorconversioniftheactisorisreasonably
believedtobenecessaryforthepurposeofavoidingpublicdisaster.
MousesCase
i. Facts:boatduringstorm,hadtothrowoutcaskofwine
ii. Rule:destructionofpropertytosavelivesislawful.Ifitsanactofnature,nooneisliable
Suroccov.Geary
i. Facts:DblewupPshousetostopafirethatwasragingthroughSanFran
ii. Holding:whenactionsareundertakenforgreaterinterestofcommunity/societyNL
iii. Limitation:MISTAKEisnotadefense=ifmistakeismade,DisLfordamages
Struvev.Droge
i. Facts:Landlordthoughttherewasafire,broketenantswindowtostopit
ii. Holding:ifpublicnecessitydoesntexistandnoneedfordestruction,thepersondestructingpropertyisLfordamages
1. Destructorisboundattheirperiltocorrectlyasseswhennecessitysituationexists
iii. Limitation:lawenforcementdestroyingpropertytogettoasuspect
1. Maj:municipalitywillcompensatepropertyowners

UnintentionalTorts

14

Negligence
54.

Elements
a. DUTY
b. BREACHOFDUTY
c. CAUSE
i. Infact/butfor
ii. Proximate
d. DAMAGES

Duty

First,askwhetherundertheparticularcircumstancestherelationshipbetweenDandPissufficienttogiverisetoadutyonthepartofDtoexercise
reasonablecarenottoinjureP.
Rule:nodutyif

Nospecialrelationship

YouractionsdidntcauseorputPinthatposition
Generalrule(NOTIRONCLAD)

Misfeasancewillcreateaduty,oftentimesnonfeasancewillnot(unlessaspecialrelationshipexists)
55.

DutiesarisingfromaffirmativeactsDhaddutytoP(tousereasonablecare)Dbreachedthatduty
a.

Affirmativeactsomesortofactthatcreatessomesortofrisk,injuryorharmorhasthepotentialtodoso.
i. Youreunderadutywhenyouengageinanactionthatcausesharmortheriskofharm
ii. Affirmativeactsarethesortsofactsthatcreaterisksforothersmostcommonsortofduty
b. Rest37Dutyp.218
i. Anactorordinarilyhasadutytoexercisereasonablecarewhentheactorsconductcreatesariskofphysicalharm.
ii. Inexceptionalcases,whenanarticulatedcountervailingprinciple/policywarrantsdenyingorlimitingliabilityinaparticular
classofcases,acourtmaydecidethattheDhasnodutyorthattheordinarydutyofreasonablecarerequiresmodification.
c. Misfeasancev.nonfeasance
i. Nonfeasancedoingnothing(usuallynoduty)
ii. Misfeasanceactionyouvedonethatputspersoninaworsepositioncreatesduty
d. Reasonsfornothavingageneraldutytoact
i. Individualfreedomandautonomy
ii. Createsmassiveamountofliability
iii. Peoplecantrytohelpanddomoreharmthangood
iv. Putspeopleinanontenablesituation,ifyouscrewupwellsueyou..sonoonewouldhelp
e.
Yaniav.Bigan
i. Facts:DtauntedPtojumpintoditch.Pdrown
ii. Issue:
1. whetherDisliableifacompetentadultdiesasaresultofverbaltauntingforinjuries/death
2. whethertheDsactionnottorescuepersonjumpingtoowndeathconstitutesnegligence
iii. Holding:verbalencouragementisnotanaffirmativeactwhenamentallycompetentadultisinvolved.Phadfullmental
capacitiesandputselfinthatsituation

Someone who finds another in a position of peril is under no legal

duty to rescue the person, unless he or she is legally responsible for
placing the person in the perilous position.
Rule:

iv.
314DutytoRescue
i. ThefactthattheactorrealizesorshouldrealizethatactiononhispartisnecessaryforanothersaidorprotectionDOESNOT
itselfimposeuponadutytotakesuchaction.
g. 321.DutytoActWhenPriorConductisFoundtoBeDangerousp.221
i. Iftheactordoesanact,andsubsequentlyrealizesorshouldrealizethatithascreatedanunreasonableriskofcausingphysical
harmtoanother,heisunderadutytoexercisereasonablecaretopreventtheriskfromtakingeffect.
h. 322.DutytoAidAnotherHarmedbyActorsConduct
i. Iftheactorknowsorhasreasontoknowthatbyhisconduct,whethertortiousorinnocent,hehascausedsuchbodilyharmto
anotherastomakehimhelplessandindangeroffurtherharm,theactorisunderadutytoexercisereasonablecaretoprevent
suchfurtherharm.

i. Weirumv.RKO
f.

15

i.
ii.

Facts:PdiedwhenteenagerchasedafterDJ
Issue:isapersonthatcreatesanincentiveforotherpeopleresponsiblefornegligencewhentheotherpeoplearecarelessand
causeanotherharm
iii. Holding:DisresponsibleforputtingPinworsepositionmalfeasance!
iv. Reasoning:Dcreatedanunreasonableriskofharm
v. Rule:ifaDengagesinanovertactthatcreatesanunduerisktothepublicandjeopardizesthesafetyofinnocentpartiesit
maybeanaffirmativeact(butnotbrightlinerule)

j. GlobeMalleablev.NYCent
i. Facts:DstraindidntstoptoletfiretruckthoughtoPsburningbuilding
ii. Issue:doesaRRhaveadutytosuspendoperationifitrealizesthatitscontinuedoperationwillresultinharm>
iii. Holding:trainsgoingthroughtownsowesomedutytothepublicinanemergency.Knowingofanemergencyconditionshould
yieldwhatotherwisewouldbeitsrights.Iftheydontyielditsamisfeasance
iv. Class:cananaffirmativeactconstitutefailuretodeviateformanongoingcourseofaction?
1. Differentwayofthinkingtrainsgoinginonedirectionatasteadyspeed
2. Theaffirmativeactherewasfailingtoact
k.
Soldanov.ODaniels
i. Facts:Dsbartenderdidntletsomeonecallforhelpwhenemergencyexisted
ii. Issue:isabusinessrequiredtoallowemergencyphoneuse
iii. Rule:Abusinessopentothepubliccanbeheldliableforrefusingtoallowsomeonetousethephonewhenitsanemergency.
1. Justbecausetheresnospecialrelationshipdoesntmeantheresnoduty
iv. Deviationfromgeneralrulethattheresnoobligationtosaveevenifnocostassociatedwithit
1. Reliance!Bydenyinguseofphone,youveputtheminaworseposition
v. PP:wedontwanttrespassing,soruledoesntapplytoprivatehomes,butpublicestablishmentsshouldallowforusewhen
somethingrequireslittleeffortduringbusinesshours

l. Stanglev.FiremanFund
i. Facts:PaskedDtousephonetoreporttheftofring
ii. Holding:mustbeimminentdangertousephone.Thiswasntanemergencybecauselifewasntatstake.
iii. Rule:nodutywhenonlypropertyisatstake
m. TheoreticalPerspectives
i. AmesLawandMorals
1. Weneedmorelegallyimposedmoralitytosavepeoplewhenitsoflittlecosttoyou
ii. EpsteintheoryofSL
1. Linedrawnproblemwheredowedrawitshouldrichpeoplehavetogiveitalluptosavelifeofchild?
iii. LandesandPosner
1. Keepsgovtatbay,altruismmayprovideanadequatesubstitutionforlegalcoerciontorescue
iv. SusanBender
1. Wetakethepersonoutofitanddontconsideractualpersonslife

56. Dutiesarisingfromundertakings
i.

ii.

iii.

SometimesaDwhohasnodutytoastrangermayacquireadutybyundertakingtoprovideassistanceorotherwisevoluntarily
takingonresponsibilities
Rest323.NegligentPerformanceofUndertakingtoRenderServicesp.233
1. Onewhoundertakes,gratuitouslyorforconsideration,torenderservicestoanotherwhichehshouldrecognizeas
necessaryfortheprotectionofothersperson/things,issubjecttoliabilitytotheotherforphysicalharmresulting
fromhisfailuretoexercisereasonablecaretoperformhisundertaking,if
a. Hisfailuretoexercisesuchcareincreasestheriskofsuchharm,OR
b. Theharmissufferedbecauseoftheothersrelianceupontheundertaking
324.DutyofOnewhoTakesChargeofAnotherWhoIsHelplessp.233
1. Onewho,beingundernodutytodoso,takeschargeofanotherwhoishelplessadequatelytoaidorprotecthimselfis
subjecttoliabilitytotheotherforanybodilyharmcausedtohimby
a. Thefailureoftheactortoexercisereasonablecaretosecurethesafetyoftheotherwhilewithintheactors
charge,OR
b. Theactorsdiscontinuinghisaid/protection,ifbysodoingheleavestheotherinaworsepositionthan
whentheactortookchargeofhim.

b. Undertakingthatcreatedutiesfordoctors

i. Hurleyv.Eddingfield

1. Facts:Psentforonlyphysicianaround,whohadnootherresponsibilities,butrefusedtocometoPscare
2. Issue:Doesadoctorhaveadutytocareforeverypatientthatrequestsavisit?
3. Holding:Nodutyofdoctopracticeatall,otherthantermshechoosestoaccept
4. Rule:doctorsarefreetodeclinetohelppeople
5. PP:otherwiseitmakesengaginginaparticularprofessiontooonerous
a. Deterrentformedicalfield,doctorswouldbecalledandliableallthetime
ii. Oneillv.MontefioreHospital

1.
2.
3.
4.

Issue:Phavingheartattackwasturneddownathospitalbcofinsurance.Calledfamilydoc,headvisedthemto
comebacklaterwhenanotherdocwouldaccepttheirplan
Issue:BytakingphonecalldidphysicianundertakeadutytocaretheP
Holding:Aphysician,whoundertakesorexaminesapatientandthenabandonsthemisliable.
Rationale:Preliedondocsadvice,wasleftinaworsestate

16

c. Undertakingsthatputpartiesinaworseposition

i. USv.Lawter

1. Facts:CoastguardattemptstosaveP,butnegligentlyraisedher,slippedandkilledher
2. Issue:doesagovernmententityattemptingtohelpsomeoneassumeadutyofcarewheretheyotherwisewouldnot
3. Holding:evenagratuitousundertakingmustnotputthepersoninworsepositionbynegligenthandling
4. Rule:Obligationofthecoastguardisthatofaprivatesalver
ii. Frankv.US

1. Facts:CoastguardtriestosavePwithoneremainingvesselduringstorm
2. Issue:doesthegovtassumeadutytocareforallcitizensduringviolentactsofnature?
3. Holding:ifoneusesdiligenteffortandallavailablemeans,therescuercannotbefoundliableforharm
4. Rule:becauseresourcesaresometimesscarceandpeopleareinalotoftrouble,therescueworkersarenotrequired
torescueeveryoneinalotoftroublecantcreatethatlevelofexpectation,toobigofburden
iii. Marsalisv.LaSallecatscratchfever(problem)

1. Facts:DscatscratchedPinstore.DaskedPtoconfinewhileshetestedforrabies.Ddidntconfine,catgotout.Ifcat
hadntgottenoutPwouldnthavetakenprecautionarymeasures.Asaresultshewasallergictoshot
2. Holding:relianceonapromisetocontaincreatesaduty.Catcausedpotentialdanger,Dhadadutytoexercisecare
byputtingcatawayunderdangerwasestablished.
a. SinceDbreacheddutybylettingcatrunwild,themostpreventativemeasureshadtobetaken,causingPto
becomeillduetoDsnegligence
b. Eventobligedtotakeanaction,andshefailedtheaffirmativeact(omission)whichcausedtheharm
iv. Bloombergv.InterinsuranceExchange(problem)

1. Facts:PcalledDwhencarwasstuckonhighway.Towtruckcouldntfindthem,drunkdriverhitcar
2. Ruling:thiscasecouldgoeitherway
a. Nopreexistingspecialrelationship
b. Butreliance?PutPinworsepositionbcreliedonpromisetosendhelp

d. GoodSamaritanDoctrine
i.
ii.

Nospecialrelationship=noduty.Butifyourenderaid(undertaking),youhaveadutytofinish
PrimarypurposeofGoodSamaritanlaws
1. Induceactionbyprovidingindividualswithsomelevelofimmunitywhentheytrytoassist
a. Behaviorhastobereallyegregiousbeforeyouareliablemoststatedonthavethisthough
iii. Ocotillov.SuperiorCourt

1. Facts:Friendtoldcountryclubhewouldgivefriendride,theygavehimmanskeys,hegavethembacktofriend
2. Issue:doesabusinessstillhaveadutytocareforapersonifanotherpersonhasvolunteeredtotakeoverthatduty?
3. Holding:heleftPinaworsepositionwhenhetookkeysfromDdidntusereasonablecaretotakehimhome
4. Rule:324nodutytorenderaid,butonceyoudo,youhavetofinishwithcare

e. Undertakingsofthirdparties

i. Cuppyv.Bunch

1. Facts:Ddrovedrunkfriendtohiscar,toldhimtofollowhimhome,swervedandhitP
2. Issue:doesanagreementtoleadhomeconstituteaspecialrelationshiporanassumptionofcare?
3. Holding:315nodutybcnospecialrelationship.Heldthathedidntundertakeaduty
ii. DifferencebetweenCuppyandocotillo
1. Nodefinitivestatementoractionsuggestinghewastakingcarenospecialrelationship,sonodutytocarefor
friend,eventhoughhehadanoptiontodoso,didntundertakeassistanceofdecedent

57. Specialrelationships
i.

Usuallynonfeasancedoesnotgetpeopleintroubleabsentaspecialrelationship

b.
Dutiestorescueorassistothers

c.

i. PetitionofTransPacFishing

1. Facts:3crewmenofboatwashedoverboard,captaindidntsearchforthem
2. Rule:Captainhasadutytorescueineverypossiblewaytocrewspecialrelationship
CommonCarrierDoctrine
i. Acarriersdutytopassengersextendsfromwhenboardingplanetoexitingontoterminal
1. Breachdutyifcarrierhasdonesomethingunreasonableandpersonisinaworseshape
2. Specialrelationshipexists
ii. Limitofthecommoncarrierdoctrine
1. Specialrelationship,duty,responsibilityendswhenyougetofftrain/plane.Oncetheygetofftransportationvehicle
theownersandoperatorsdonthaveadutytoyou

17
iii. Brosnahanv.WesternAirLines

1. Facts:passengerstuffedbagsintooverhead,fellandhurtP
2. Issue:
3. Holding:Airlinesdutytosuperviseboardingprocessforprotectionofcustomerscontinuesuntilboardingis
complete
iv. Boyettev.TransWorldAirlines

1. Facts:Pgotdrunk,gotchasedbypersonnelinterminal,hidintrashcompactor
2. Issue:whendoescommoncarrierdoctrineexpire
3. Holding:dutyexistsonlywhenthespecialrelationshipexists.Dutyendsoncepassengerreachesreasonablysafe
place
SocialHosts

i. Charlesv.Seigfried

1. Facts:UnderagePdrankatDspartyadultwhoservedherandknowinglyletherdriveandgotinawreck
2. Rule:Asocialhostdoesntoweadutybyvirtueofengagingintheactofservingalcohol.
3. Holding:Thecauseoftheintoxicationandresultinginjuryisthedrinkingoftheintoxicant,notthefurnishingofthe
alcohol.
4. PP:Withtheriseofdrunkdrivers,somecourtshavedecidedtoimposeadutytosocialhosts.Asageneralruleifyou
breakalawitspersenegligence.Whyisntthisanopenshutcase?Theburdenistoogreattoputoneveryone
involved.Oneofthesocialhostsdutiesisnottomonitorthedrinkingofeveryonethere.
5. Blanketrule:liabilityrestswiththeindividualwhoisdrinkingorhasbeendrinkinganddriving
ii. Kellyv.Gwinnel

1. Facts:Dsdrunkguestcaused3rdpartyaccident
2. Holding:SCimposedliabilitytosocialhostwhoseguestcauseddeathof3rdparty
3. Balancingactopinionsuggestthatthebenefitoftheunrestraineddrinkingisnotworththecostofanumberoflives
iii. Tradeoffsinvolvedinhavingdutiesofsocialhostsettledbylawthancourts
1. Nobias
2. Morewellknown,deterrence

d.

iv.
DutiestoProtectothersfromthirdparties

dutytowarn
1.
2.

v.

vi.

vii.

AdutysometimesbasedontherelationshipnotbetweenhePandDbutbetweentheDandthepartycausingthem
Restatement315
a. Aspecialrelationexistsbetweentheactorandthethirdpersonwhichimposesadutyupontheactorto
controlthethirdpersonsconduct,or.
b. Aspecialrelationexistsbetweentheactorandtheotherwhichgivestheotherarighttoprotection
BreachofPatientConfidentiality
1.
Tarasoffv.Regents
a. Facts:patienttolddoctorhewasgoingtokilP.Hewasdetainedbrieflybycampuspolice,butreleasedbche
appearedrational.NoonewarnedPofpotentialdanger
b. Issue:Doesadoctorhaveadutytoreportapotentialthreattoapersonifitbreachesdocpatientconfident
c. Holding:doctorshaveadutytoprotectanidentifiable3rdpartybecauseoftheirrelationshipwithP.Therewasa
specialrelationshipbetweendocandD,whichgaverisetodocsdutytoprotectidentifiedP
d. Generalrule:nodutyisowedtocontrolorwarnofconductofanother,exceptwherespecrel.exists
2.
Thompsonv.CountyofAlameda
a. Facts:juvioffendersaidifreleasedhewouldkillachildinparentsneighborhood.Whenreleasedhekilled
b. Issue:doesamunicipalityhaveadutytowarnanareathatanoffenderwasbeingreleased
c. Holding:unlikeTarasoff,specificvictimswerenotidentified.Warningeveryoneintheneighborhoodwouldbe
toobroadanddifficult
d. PP:mightjeopardizerehabefforts
i. Stigmatizingreleasedoffenders
ii. Inhibitingtheirrelease
iii. Specificpersonnotidentified
iv. Warningoverandoverwontmakethreatsasseriouscryingwolf
LandlordTenant
1.
Klinev.1500MassachutesAvenue
a. Facts:Passaultedinapt.building.Landlordknewofdanger,hadremoveddoormen
b. Issue:doesalandlordhaveaspecialrelationshipwithtenantsthatgivehimadutytoprotecttenantsinhisbuilding
c. Holding:landlordisnoinsurerofhistenantssafetybuthecertainlyisnobystander.Ifhehasnoticeofrepeated
assaults/robberies,andhaspowertopreventthis,itsfairtoassigndutytolandlord
DoctorPatient
1.
Bradshawv.Daniel
a. Facts:DdiagnosedPshusbandwithdiseasehediedthenextday.Dfailedtowarnherofherrisk
b. Issue:Doesahealthcareproviderhaveadutytowarnapatientsspousethattheymightalsobeatrisk
c. Holding:theresadutyfordoctortowarnathirdpartywhenitsaforeseeablerisk&partyisidentifiable

18
2.
Hawkinsv.Pizarro
a. Facts:DdocgavefalsenegativeresultstoP,whoinfectedhusband
b. Issue:canadoctorbeliableto3rdpersonifhisnegligencecausethemtocontractdisease
c. Holding:norelationshipbecausepartyisfuturethirdparty(shewasntmarriedtohimattimeoftest)so
unidentifiable

viii.
PublicDutyDoctrine(IssuesofsovereignImmunity)
1.

Sovereignimmunity
a. Commonlaw=nolawsuitsagainstgovtw/oconsent.Now,thisimmunityiswaivedforvariouspurposes
i. Dutyisdifficulttoprove
ii. APcanonlysuebydemonstratingaspecialrelationshipwithP
iii. PP:inorderforgovernmentstofunction,havetolimitextenttheyareexposedtoliability
2.
Rissv.NY
a. Facts:mangetssomeonetothrowlyeintheeyesofexlover
b. Issue:doesacityhaveadutyorSRwithacitizenthatmakesrequestsforprotectionNO
c. Holding:theamountofprotectionislimitedbyresourcesofcommunityandlegis/execdecisiononhowtodeploy
thoseresources
d. Predictablelimits:gangmembersthatleavetheirgangs,hugeincreaseinamountoflawsuit
e. Dissent:itwouldbegoodforcitytobeliablepromisingeffectslikethatofWCenactment
3.
Schusterv.NY
a. Facts:Pgavepoliceinfoofmaninwantedposter,laterwaskilled
b. Issue:isthereadutyforpolicetoprovideprotectionwhentheywerehelpedputhimthere?
c. Holding:SRariseswhenpeoplehavecollaboratedwithpolice/municipalityforarrest.Dutyistousereasonable
carefortheirpoliceprotectionwherereasonablydemandedorsought
d. Reasoning:thisisnolongerpassive,iftheyrequestpolicehelp,theyneedtoacttofurnishpoliceprotection.Police
didntbehavereasonably,soonlywaytoescapeliabilityisifthereisnoduty
e. PP:noonewouldcooperatewiththepolice
4. DifferencebetweenSchuster&Riss
a. HesdevelopedaSRwithpolicebyworkingforthem.RELIANCEonpoliceandtheirprotection.They
solicitedpublicforhelp,andputhiminaWORSEPOSSITION
5.
Rulesforwhenlawenforcementhasadutytoaprivateindividual
a. Publicmatter/danger
b. Reliance/worseposition
c. Policeaskedforhelp
6.
Wanzerv.DC(problem)
a. taketwoaspirinandcallmeinthemorning:,reliedandputinaworseposition
b. Holding:onetimecallto911doesntestablishaSR,doesntcreateaduty
ix. ClassHypo:Pcalled911toreportburglary,dispatcherwrotedownwronghouse,burglarstabbedP
1. Result?Sherelied,wasputinaworseposition,shecouldhavecalledsomeoneelseinstead,publicmatter,could
affectanyoneinneighborhood,askedforhelp,
2. Whataboutruleonetimecallto911doesntcreateaduty?
a. Theytoldhertheywerecoming,createsastrongerrelianceUNDERTAKINGpleaforhelpnotrefused

58. DutiesArisingfromtheOccupationofLand
a.

DutiestoTrespassers(bylandowner)LOWESTlevel,butdutystillexists
i.
ii.

Thelawimposesaffirmativeobligationsonlandownerstousecaretowardthosewhocomeontotheirproperty
Takeawayrule:
1. Merenegligencewillnotgiverisetoliabilitywhentheownerisunawareofthetrespasser.However,iftheowner
hasreasontoknowofthetrespasserorlikelinessoftrespasser,thereisadutytorefrainfromwanton/reckless
behavior,andthereisadutytowarnofnonobviousartificialhazardousconditions.Also,maynotknowingly
conductdangerousactivitiesthatharmtrespassers.
iii. Whendoyoubreachadutytoatrespasser?
1. knowledgeofexistenceoftrespasser
a. donthavetoknowactualpresence,justhavetohavereasontoknowthatitslikelythatatrespasserwill
cometoyourland
2. knowledgeofconstantintrusionsuponlandACTIVITIESartificialconditionshighlydangerous
3. knowledgeoflikelypresenceandwontdiscoverdangerCONDITIONStrap,trench,pool
iv. 333.GeneralRule
1. Exceptasstatedin334339,apossessoroflandisnotliabletotrespassersforphysicalharmcausedbyhisfailure
toexercisereasonablecare
a. Toputthelandinaconditionreasonablysafefortheirreception,OR
b. Tocarryonhisactivitiessoasnottoendangerthem.
v. Haskinsv.Grybko

1.
2.
3.

19

Facts:Dhuntingforwoodchucks,didntrealizeheshotatrespasser
Holding:Dwasunderobligationtorefrainformintentionalinjury.SincePfailedtoshowhewasnttrespassingNL
Rule:notliabletotrespasserformerenegligence,ithastobewillful,wantonandrecklessconduct,thisduty
getbreachedwhenyoureunreasonable
vi. Herrickv.Wixom

1. Facts:mansnuckintocircusw/obuyingticket,fireworkexplodedandinjuredeye
2. Duty:therewasntwillfulwontonandrecklessconduct,butcourtsayssincetheyknewhewasthereanddidntask
himtoleaveadutywascreated.Hisstatusasatrespasserwasnotknown,buthispresenceisknown.
3. Rule:whereatrespasserisdiscoverableuponthepremisesbytheowner,heisnotbeyondthepaleofthelaw,and
anynegligenceresultingininjurywillrenderthepersonguiltyofnegligence
a. Eventhoughtheydidntknowhehimselfwastrespassing,theyknewhewasthere
4. Holding:anypersonyoureawareofonproperty,youoweadutytorefrainfromintentional/wanton/recklessconduct
5. PP:whenalotofpeoplearearound,wedontwantthemengagingindangerousactivities
vii. 334.ActivitiesHighlyDangeroustoConstantTrespassersonLimitedArea
1. Apossessoroflandwhoknows,orfromfactswithinhisknowledgeshouldknow,thattrespassersconstantlyintrude
uponalimitedareathereof,issubjecttoliabilityforbodilyharmtherecausedtothembyhisfailuretocarryonan
activityinvolvingariskofdeathorseriousbodilyharmwithreasonablecarefortheirsafety
viii. ClevelandElectricIlluminatingCo.

1. Facts:PusedDconstructionworkersouthousewithoutconsent,litcig,blewuptoilet
2. Duty:towarn?Notachild,andnotforeseeable
3. Holding:AnordinarilyprudentpersoncouldnothavereasonablyanticipatedorforeseenthatPwouldusethe
buildingthisway,orthathewouldcauseharmresultingfromDsfailuretowarn
4. Rule:inorderfortheretobeaduty,ownermustbeawarethatitsprobably/likely/possibletherewillbeatrespasser
andthataninjurywouldresultifthetrespasserisntwarned
5. PP:wewantpeopletoupholdtheirland,cantsetboobytrapstogettrespassers,NORnonobvioushazards,pit,traps,
ix. Ehretv.VillageofScarsdale

1. Facts:drainpipedencompassedagasmain.Trespasserwasasphyxiated
2. Holding:AtrespassermighthaveassumedriskthatDsuseofitslandmightengagedpeopleinside,butdidntassume
riskthatdangerwouldarisefromconditionseveralhundredfeetawayinpublicstreet
3. Rule:Takecarewhenyouknowtheremightbeatrespasser!Thisisnothingclosetoordinarycare
x. 337.ArtificialConditionsHighlyDangeroustoKnownTrespassersp.257
1. Apossessoroflandwhomaintainsonthelandanartificialconditionwhichinvolvesariskofdeath/seriousbodily
harmtopersonscomingincontactwithit,issubjecttoliabilityforbodilyharmcausedtotrespassersbyhisfailureto
exercisereasonablecaretowarnthemoftheconditionif
a. Thepossessorknowsorhasreasontoknowoftheirpresenceindangerousproximitytothecondition,
AND
b. Theconditionisofsuchanaturethathehasreasontobelievethatthetrespasserwillnotdiscoveritor
realizetheriskinvolved
xi. Keffev.Milwaukee&St.PaulRRCo

1. Facts:7yroldPcaughtleginRRturntablewhichrevolvedeasily,unfenced,locatedbyDsdepot,nearPshome
2. Holding:knewofthedanger,knewkidswentthereandplayedonit,andknewbyleavingitunguarded,hewasnot
invitingkids,butalluringthemtothedanger
3. Rule:Disboundtousecaretoprotectkidsfromaknownallurementonpropertythatkidscantappreciatedanger
a. Ifthereissomesortofdevice/activitythatonecouldreasonablybelievecouldattractandharmkids,
landownerhasresponsibilitytomakethissafe,ortaketheattractionout.
xii. Ryanv.Towar

1. Facts:kidsbrokethroughwallofbuildingtoplayonanoldwheelofcompanynolongerinbusiness
2. Holding:ithastoattractandbevisibletobeanallurementconcealedinpropertywherechildrenarentanticipated
isnotfairalsounfairbcthecompanywasshutdown
a. Cthereannoyedwithkids,keffeprovedmoreinfluential
xiii. Law:poolsmustbeenclosed
xiv. Rule:ifyouhaveanattractiveordangerousdeviceonlandandchildreninjurethemselves,youareliable,UNLESS
1. Lookat:ifowneractedreasonablytoprevent
xv. 339.ArtificialConditionsHighlyDangeroustoTrespassingChildrenp.260
1. Apossessorofalandissubjecttoliabilityforphysicalharmtochildrentrespassingthereoncausedbyanartificial
conditionuponthelandif
a. Theplacewheretheconditionexistsisoneuponwhichthepossessorknows/shouldknowthatchildrenare
likelytotrespass,AND
b. Theconditionisoneofwhichthepossessorknows/shouldknowandrealizes/shouldrealizewillinvolvean
unreasonableriskofdeath/bodilyharmtosuchchildren,AND
c. Children,becauseoftheiryouth,dontknowoftheconditionortheriskinvolved,AND

20
d.

Theutilitytothepossessorofmaintainingtheconditionandtheburdenofeliminatingthedangerare
slightascomparedwiththeriskofchildreninvolved(HANDFORMULA),AND
i. Thepossessor

b. DutiestoLicenseessocialguests
i.

Dutytolicensee
1. TheremustbeAWARENESS,or
2. Negligentactthatsetstrap
ii. 330.LicenseeDefined
1. Alicenseeisapersonwhoisprivilegedtoenterorremainonlandonlybyvirtueofthepossessorsconsent.
SOCIALGUEST
iii. 341.ActivitiesDangeroustoLicensees
1. Apossessoroflandissubjecttoliabilitytohislicenseesforphysicalharmcausedtothembyhisfailuretocarryon
hisactivitieswithreasonablecarefortheirsafetyif,butonlyif
a. Heshouldexpectthattheywillnotdiscover/realizethedanger,AND
b. Theydonotknow/havereasontoknowofthepossessorsactivitiesandoftheriskinvolved.
iv. 342.DangerousConditionsKnowntoPossessor
1. Apossessoroflandissubjecttoliabilityforphysicalharmcausedtolicenseesbyconditiononthelandif,butonlyif,
a. Thepossessorknows/hasreasontoknowoftheconditionandshouldrealizethatitinvolvesan
unreasonableriskofharmtosuchlicensees,andshouldexpectthattheywillnotdiscover/realizethe
danger,AND
b. Hefailstoexercisereasonablecaretomaketheconditionsafe,ortowarnthelicenseesofthe
condition/riskinvolved,AND
c. Thelicenseesdontknow/havereasontoknowofthecondition/riskinvolved.
d. Illustration1AinviteshisfriendBtodinner.Aknowsthathisprivateroadhasbeendangerously
underminedatapointwhereitrunsalonganembankmentandthatthisisnotobservabletoaperson
drivingalongtheroad.A,whengivingtheinvitation,forgetstowarnBofthis.AissubjecttoliabilitytoB
e. Illustration2Samefactsasabove,exceptthatAdoesnotknowthattheroadhasbeenunderminedbut
couldhavediscoveredithadhepaidattentiontotheconditionofhisroad,AisnotliabletoB.
v. Daviesv.McDowellNationalBank

1. Facts:Pswerevisitingfatherathisbusiness,theydiedfromasphyxiation
2. Issue:doesabusinesshaveadutytoasocialguest
3. Rule:lookatrelationshipandreasonforvisit.Purposematters,notlocation
4. Holding:inthisinstancetherewasnoevidencetoshowDhadanypreviousknowledgeoflatentdangercondition
a. Ownerisonlyliableforlatentdangerousconditionsexistingwhenhehasknowledgeofconditionandfails
togivewarningtoInvitee.Whenjustlicenseesheonlyhadtobeawareoftheharmfulcondition
vi. Lordiv.Spiotta

1. Facts:PwasatDshouse,PbathedandaskedDtoturnoffboiler.Dthoughthehad,butfailed,andPssonlaterlita
matchtolightitagainandwaskilled
2. Issue:Isapersonwhoaccidentallycausesharmtoanotheronhispropertyguiltyofnegligence
3. Holding:theownerisliablewhereguestisinjuredbyanunknowndangercreatedbyproprietorsnegligence
a. Doesnthavetobeegregiousnegligence,justsomelevelofnegligence
b. HeessentiallycreatedatrapforP
c. Byaskinghimtolightboiler,Dheldouttheplacewasfreeformconcealedperil
d. Thisactamountedinactivenegligence
4. Rule:Evenifthereisntactualknowledgeofthecondition,butsetsatrapforthesocialguesttowalkinto,thenL
a. Inordertogetthesetatrapsituation,thelandowner(orsomeonethroughhisagents)musthaveDONE
somethingthatconstruednegligence(somethinglessthanperfectlyreasonable)
b. IftheresnoactiononthepartoflandownerANDnoawarenessofcondition,thenNL

c. Dutiestoinvitees
i.

ii.

iii.
iv.

Dutyofreasonablecarewithrespecttoeverything.Dmustinspectandwarnvisitorsofhazardsifheshouldexpectthatthey
willnotrealizethedanger!Twotypesofinvitees
1. Business$$benefit&Publichugecrosssectionofpeople
Rationaleforhavingahigherdutyasalandownerfromvisittobusinessinvitee
1. $$benefityoureluringpeopleinforaprofit,someof$shouldgotokeepingbusinesssafe
2. wanttoincentivizesafety
3. differencebetweenpublicparkinvitee
a. everyoneisbenefittingthere,nooneisreallymakingaprofittopublic
Dutiestoinviteesoflandowner
1. RatherthanjustWARN,youhavetoINSPECTgolookingforproblems
Whatdistinguishesavolunteerfromaninvitee
1. Ifabusinessownerrecruitsaninviteetoassist,andtheinviteeisinjured,theresgoingtobeL

21
v.

332.InviteeDefined
1. Aninviteeiseitherapublicinviteeorabusinessvisitor.
2. Apublicinviteeisapersonwhoisinvitedtoenter/remainonlandasamemberofthepublicforapurposeforwhich
thelandisheldopentothepublic.(Museums,churches,airports)
3. Abusinessvisitorisapersonwhoisinvitedtoenter/remainonlandforapurposedirectlyorindirectlyconnected
withbusinessdealingswiththepossessoroftheland.(Storecustomers;deliverypeople)
4. Illustration1Ahiresahallandgivesafreepubliclectureonareligioustopic.Basamemberothepublicattends
thelecture.Bisaninvitee
5. Illustration2CityofXmaintainsafreepubliclibrary,fortheuseofanyoneinthecommunity.Acomestothe
librarytoreadabook.Aisaninvitee.ButifAenterstomeetafriend,ormerelytogetoutoftherain,heisnotan
invitee.
6. Comment1Iftheinviteegoesoutsideoftheareofhisinvitation,hebecomesatrespasseroralicensee,depending
uponwhetherhegoestherewithouttheconsentofthepossessor,orwithsuchconsent.Thusonewhogoesintoa
shopwhichoccupiespartofabuilding,therestofwhichisusedasthepossessorsresidence,isatrespasserifhe
goesintotheresidentialpartofthepremiseswithouttheshopkeepersconsent;butheisalicenseeiftheshopkeeper
permitshimtogotothebathroom,orinviteshimtopayasocialcall.
vi. 341A.ActivitiesDangeroustoInvitees
1. Apossessoroflandissubjecttoliabilitytohisinviteesforphysicalharmcausedtothembyhisfailuretocarryonhis
activitieswithreasonablecarefortheirsafetyif,butonlyif,
a. Heshouldexpectthattheywillnotdiscover/realizethedanger,OR
b. Theywillfailtoprotectthemselvesagainstit.
vii. 343.DangerousConditionsKnowntoorDiscoverablebyPossessor
1. Apossessoroflandissubjecttoliabilityforphysicalharmcausedtohisinviteesbyaconditiononthelandif,but
onlyif,he
a. Knowsorbytheexerciseofreasonablecarewoulddiscoverthecondition,andshouldrealizethatit
involvesanunreasonableriskofharmtosuchinvitees,AND
b. Shouldexpectthattheywillnotdiscoverorrealizethedanger,orwillfailtoprotectthemselvesagainstit,
AND
c. Failstoexercisereasonablecaretoprotectthemagainstthedanger.
viii. CityofRocaRatonv.Matteff

1. Facts:PpaintedDswatertower.NoKbchewentaheadandpaintedbeforeKwassigned/agreed
2. Holding:Phadnotreachedstatusofaninvitee,butwasntatrespasserbcsuperintendentknewofhispresence
a. Alicenseetakesthepremisesashefindsthemanddutyofowneristorefrainfromwantonnegligenceor
willfulmisconductthatwouldinjurethelicensee
ix. Jacobsmav.Goldbergs

1. Facts:Pshoppingwhenmanageryelledstopthief!Pjumpedatthief,gotclotheshehadstolen,injuredshoulder
2. Holding:DbreachedadutyofcaretoPbcithadactualknowledgethatmanwasathief.WiththisknowledgetheD
becamechargedwithresponsibilitytoprotectitsinviteesfromillegalactsbyhim
3. Reasoning
a. PbusinessinviteeDowedhimadutytoexerciseordinarycare,Darguedthathewasavolunteerwhen
heyelledforhelp,butwithPsproximitytothemanagerandshoplifter,itwasreasonabletoassumehewas
requestingPsassistance
b. PurposeofattemptingtorestrainthiefwasbenefittoD;thispurposewassufficienttosustaininviteestatus
x. Householdguestsinuniform
1. InviteehomeownercalledFD,theywerewantedandinvitedintohouse.Sincehewasnegligentinnotreasonably
inspectingstaircase,heisliabletothembecausehedidntexercisecare
xi. Rowlandv.ChristianMINORITYVIEW

1. Facts:PcuthandonDssink.DangerwasclearandDknewofit
2. Holding:distinctionb/tinvitees,licenseeandtrespassersisobsolete
3. ProperTest:whethertheownerhasactedasareasonablemaninviewofprobabilityofinjurytoothersANDstatus
oftres/invit/licenswontdetermineissueofliabilityonitsown
xii. Carterv.Kinney

1. Facts:PslippedoniceatDshouseatbiblestudy
2. Holding:MOcourtsarenotinfavorofremovingdistinctionsifweweretogetridofdistinctionsitwoulderode
rightsoflandownerandburdencourts
3. PP:peopleshouldntbedevaluedbythelaw
4. Donttearapartdistinctionsandclearrulesthatweveworkedalongtimetoestablishandpreserve
xiii. Rhodesv.IllinoisCentralGulfRR(problem)
1. Manleftinstation,conductormadeseveralcallsabouthispresence
xiv. Yourmoneyorhislife(problem)

59. ThePrivityLimitation
a.

GeneralConcepts

i.

22

AandBenterintoaK.Bperformsitnegligently,causingCtoeinjured.AhasrightsagainstB,butdoesC?
1. Sometimesno,bcCisnotincontract(notinprivity)withB
ii. Weareinprivitywitheachotherifthereisadirectcontactwitheachotherandwehaveanagreement
iii. Privitygetseachpartytheprotection/obligationowedfromonepartytoanother
b.
H.R.MochCov.RensselaerWater
i. Facts:PsbuildingwasburnedbecauseDwatercodidntfulfillprovisionsofKwithcitytoprovideenoughwater
ii. Issue:whenoneisunderKwithanother,ifbybreachingthatKathirdpartyisharmed,isbreacherofKliable?
iii. Holding:apublicpersonmaynotholdapartythathascontractedwiththecityliableforfailingtofulfilldutytothecity
iv. Rule:benefitmustbeonethatisnotincidentalandsecondary.NotmaintainableforbreachofK,ortort
v. PP:thiswouldopenupPandorasbox.Nowatercowoulddobusinessw/citybcnonecouldaffordexposetoomuchliability
c.
Biakanjav.Irving
i. Facts:Ddrewupinvalidwillwhichhurtdeceasedsdaughter
ii. Issue:whetherDwasunderadutytoexercisecaretoprotectPfrominjuryandliablefordamagecausedbyhisnegeven
thoughtheywerenottheonesinK.
iii. Holding:athirdpersonnotinprivityisamatterofpolicy,manyfactorsneedtobeconsidered
1. TheendandaimoftheentiretransactionwastopassestatetoP.(Dmusthavebeenawareofthetermsofthewill)
2. Butfortest
a. asPsdaddiedw/orevokinghiswill,butforDsneg,wouldhavereceivedallofhisestate,factthatshe
didntwasdirectlycausedbyDsconduct
iv. Therearealotoffactorsthecourtconsiders

1. TheextenttowhichthetransactionwasintendedtoaffecttheP
2. Theforeseeabilityofharmtohim
3. ThedegreeofcertaintythatthePsufferedinjury
4. TheclosenessoftheconnectionbetweentheDsconductandtheinjurysuffered
5. ThemoralblameattachedtotheDsconduct
6. Thepolicyofpreventingfutureharm
60.

NegligencePerSe:ViolationsofCriminalStatutes
a.
b.

CourtdeterminesthatDhasviolatedsomesortofrule(statutoryorjudgemade)andnegligenceisestablishedasamatteroflaw
GeneralRule:Whenastatuteisviolated,andtheviolationofthestatutecausesthepreciseinjuryorharmthatthestatuteisdesignedto
protectagainst,youwillhavenegligenceperse.
i. ArgumentsFor/Against
1. For:
a. Whenthelegislaturehassaidcertainprecautionsshouldbetakenorcertainactsshouldntbedone,a
personhasnotactedreasonablywhentheydotheseacts.
b. Thelegislatureisthevoiceofthepeople,whichhasbarredsuchconduct.
2. Against:
a. Sometimesitsimpossibletoobeythelawdespitethebestwillintheworld.
b. Moststatutessaynothingaboutwhatrolethelegislativestandardshouldplayintortactionfordamages.
c. LegislativeIntentquestionoflegislativeintentusuallyiscriticalwhenattemptingtodeterminewhetheraprovisionofacriminal
codescreatescivilliability
d.
Martinv.Herzog
i. Facts:DviolatedcrossingovermiddlelineruleandPviolateddrivingwithoutlightson
ii. Issue:ifbothdriversarenegligent,doestheactionshowntobecauseofnegtrumpotherdriversconduct/negligence?
iii. Holding:lackofvisionwasthecauseofthedisaster.Sightshouldhavebeenarouseandguidedbystatutorywarnings
iv. Rule:ifapartyviolatedthestatute,juryisnotallowedtorevisittodecideifitsnegligentviolationisnegperseifaviolation
ofastatuteiscausallyrelatedtotheaccidentthenitsprimafacienegligence
e.
Tinglev.Chicago
i. Facts:DrantrainonSunday,whichhitPscow.Pdidntclaimneg,justpointedtolawprohibitingtrainsonSunday
ii. Rule:purposeofstatutewasnottoavoidharm,soDisnotnegligentperse
iii. Holding:proxcauseofinjurywasnotoperationoftrain,butresultedformanaccidentfrowhichDisnotresponsible
iv. Rationale:wedontruntrainsonSundaysbcofGod,nottoavoidhittingacow
1. Lookatwhattheviolatedstatutesays:whatsittherefore?Whatwastheoutcomethestatutewastryingtoprevent?
Whoisthestatuefor?
v. Lesson:therehastobeaconnectionbetweenthepurposeofthestatuteandtheharm
f. HogHypop.176288BIllustration2:Astatute,construedasintendedonlytopreventmisbreedingofanimals,providesthathogs
shallbeconfinedbyfencesofspecifiedstrength.Inviolationofthestatute,Afencesinhishogswithafenceoflessstrength.Oneofthe
hogsbreaksthroughthefence,escapesintothehighway,andisstruckbyBscar,asaresultofwhichBisinjured.Althoughthestatute
doesnotdefineastandardofconductwhichwillbeadoptedasamateroflawforBsaction,itsprovisionsareadmissibleandrelevant
evidenceastothenecessityofafenceofthespecifiedstrengthfortheproperconfinementofhogs.
i. PurposeofStatuteCAvoidHarmD
ii. Notnegligenceperse,butyoucanenteritasevidencebecauseitisrelevantduetospecificationsforhowyoushouldconfine
hogs.

23

iii. Whenhogsbreaklooseandroamtheycandoalotofdamagebesidemisbreeding
iv. Itisveryforeseeablethatitcouldinjurewhenkeptclosetoroad
g.
Brownev.Shyne
i. Facts:DchirowasnotlicensedwhenoperatingonP.
ii. Issue:isthepracticeofmedicinewithoutalicensethetypethatmakesyounegperse?
iii. Holding:theprotectionwhichthestatuewasintendedtoprovidewasagainstriskofinjurybyunskilleddoc.UnlessPsinjury
wascausedbycarelessnessorlackofskill,Dsfailuretoobtainalicensewasnotconnectedwiththeinjury
1. Therehadtobeindependentproofthatbehaviorwasnegligent,apartfromfacthewasunlicensed
iv. Rationale:absenceofthelicensedidntchangetheskilltaughtintraining,thereforeiftrainingorbehaviorwassatisfactoryNL
v. Dissent:itmaybenotbenegperse,butitshouldbeundersomeconsideration,otherwisenopurposeforlicensinglaws
h. Thisismorelikethehogcasefailuretoobtainalicensewasnotconnectedtotheinjuries
a. TheactionofalicensedchiropractorcouldhaveCAUSEDtheinjury,whereastheactionofanunlicensedchiropractormight
nothaveCAUSEDtheinjury
i. CAUSEREASONdidtheviolationofthestatutecausetheharm
b. Howcausalwastheconnectionofthestatuteandtheviolationthatoccurred?
i. PURPOSEREASONpurposeofthestatuteforlicensingwastoprotect
i. **Typicallythecourtsarereluctanttodeemanactnegligentperse,becausetheydratherthejurydetermineifthepracticewas
negligence(violatedastandardofcare).

61. TheReasonablePersonTheNegligenceStandard
i.

ii.
iii.

WhenPsuesDfornegligence;
1. 1stquestionwhetherDowedPaduty
2. 2ndquestionwithertheDbreachedthedutybyfailingtousereasonablecare
a. whetherDtookreasonableprecautionsagainsttheharmthatoccurred
b. wasthePnegligentaswell?
Negligence=sortofasynonymforcarelessness
Reasoanbleperson
1. 283.ConductofaReasonableMan;TheStandardp.122
a. Unlesstheactorisachild,thestandardofconducttowhichhemustconformtoavoidbeingnegligentis
thatofareasonablemanunderlikecircumstances.

b. MentalAbilityandMentalStates

i. Williamsv.Hays

CAVEAT
1. Facts:Captainwentcrazyatsea,refusedshiptobepulledashore.Stuckatseafordayswithfeverandmalaria
2. Issue:Canamanwhoisinsanebeliablefordamageshisactionscaused?
3. Holding:itsnotfairtoDtohavetogobeyondallthatisevenpossible.Ifhehadnotspent48hoursondecktryingto
saveshiphemighthavebeenunreasonable.Buthebehavedreasonably,perhapsheroically,sowecantturnaround
andsayhesresponsibleforactshemadewhenhewasinsane
4. Rule:insanityofDisnotadefenseofnegligence,unlesstheinsanitywasadirectcauseofeffortstopreventdamage
ornegbehavior
a. Apersonofunsoundmindisresponsiblefortheconsequencesofacts
5. PP:wewantpeopletodoallwithintheirpowertopreventharminsituationsthatwarrantit
ii. Hypo:Dsurgeongoingfor48hours
1. QuestionaboutreasonablenessofDsactions,andputtingtheminasituationwherethisresultcouldoccur
a. Lookat:Pressuretheywereunder,choicestheyhad,(jurydecideswhatsreasonable)
iii. Vaughanv.MenloveNodefenseforidiots
1. Facts:Dshayburnedonproperty.Dsaidheshouldntberesponsiblebchedidnthavehighestorderofintelligence
2. Issue:IsDsintelligence/stupidityafactortoconsiderinanegligencedefense?
3. Holding:insteadofsayingtheliabilityfornegligenceshouldgowiththejudgmentofeachindividual,werather
oughttoadheretorulewhichrequiresinallcasesaregardtocautionthattheordinarymanwouldobserve
a. Thisispreciselywhywehavereasonableperson(average)standard
4. Rule:donttailortoeachD,justjudgebynormalpeoplesstandards,andeverymanofanyintelligencelevelwill
exercisecare
5. PP:thereisnoselectivestandardofintelligenceitwouldcreatearacetothebottom.
6. PP:expectations!Needtoknowwhatsexpectedofus,needastandardcourtsapplysotherearenttoomany
variationsofoutcomes
iv. Lynchv.RosenthalcaveattomenloveMentalDisabilities
1. Facts:Pwasmentallyretarded,livedonDsfarm.Daskedhimtogobypicker,Pstumbledintoit.
2. Issue:isapersonwithextremementaldisabilitiescontributorilynegligentwhenhewasgivennowarningofdanger
3. Holding:Pwasnotcontribnegasamatteroflaw.Anexperttestifiedthathedidnttohavetheabilitytoappreciate
dangerofthemachine,thoughhewasabletounderstandadirectwarningtostayaway
4. CaveattoMenlove:ifyouhavesomeonerecognizedtobeclinicallymentallyretarded,thatistobeconsideredtojury
indeterminingwhoisreasonable.Thisdoesntmeanthatpersonhasnoobligationornocareorbeasunreasonableas
hewants,butyoujustusethisasevidencetoshowjurywhatsreasonableforhismind

24
c. PhysicalInfirmities
i.

DISTINCTDEFECTS:PHYSICALINFIRMITIES(SPECIALCHALLENGES)OliverWendellHolmesJr.
1. Itsimpossibletomeasureonesknowledgeofthelaw(althoughweholdmantoastandardthatthelawisknown).
Societywarrantsanaverageconduct;therefore,asacrificeofindividualpeculiaritiesisnecessarytogeneralwelfare.
2. Exception:Whenamanhasadistinctdefectofsuchanaturethatallcanrecognizeasmakingcertainprecautions
impossible,hewillnotbeanswerablefornottakingthem.Ex.Blindordeafman
3. PP:Equalitynotion:
a. Aboveaveragedonthavetowalkaroundconstantlyparanoidthatweregoingtorunintosomeonewhois
particularlyclumsywhomightnotbeheldtothesamestd.asus.
b. Belowaverage:Tellingthemtheybelongtosociety;therefore,wellelevateyoutostd.ofsociety.
c. Blindmancantseeitsunreasonabletoexpecthimto,butcanexpecthimtocompensateforlackofsight
ii. 289p.218commentNinferiorqualities
1. Iftheactorisachild,allowanceismadeforhisinferiorqualitiesofmindandbody,andthestandardbecomesthatof
areasonablemanwithsuchqualities.Iftheactorisillorotherwisephysicallydisabled,allowanceismadeforsuch
disability.
2. Exceptinsuchcases,theactorisheldtothestandardofareasonablemanastohisattention,perception,memory,
knowledgeofpertinentmatters,intelligence,judgment,eventhoughhedoesnotinfacthavethequalitiesofa
reasonableman.
3. Theindividualwhoishabituallywoolgatheringandinattentive,absentminded,forgetful,ignorantorinexperienced,
slowwitted,stupid,orafool,mustconformtothestandardsofthesocietyinwhichhelives,orifhecannotconform
tothemmuststillmakegoodondamagehedoes.
4. PP:Ingeneral,wedonttakeintoaccountindividualcharacteristicsofaD,becausethePisjusthasharmedandthe
injuryisjustasgrave.
iii. Weirsv.Jones

1. Facts:PcouldntreadEnglish;harmedbygoingoverbridgeunsafe
2. Issue:isasigninEnglishsufficienttowarnsomeoneinAmericaofdanger?
3. Holding:Precautionstoprotecttravelerswerereasonablysufficient.LawsincountryareallinEnglish,shouldhave
toputupbarriersorsignsineverylanguage
a. InabilitytospeakEnglishisNOTadistinctdefect
4. Rationale:Pcantbeallowedtoclaimthatsomestandardofcareshallbeappliedtohimwhichisnotapplicableto
personsingeneral
5. Today:probablyunreasonablenottobarricade,andpossibleunreasonablenottopostsigninSpanish?
iv. Friedmanv.State(approachcasewithcaution)
1. Facts:Jewishgirlstuckinskilift
2. Issue:isitreasonableforgirltositincoldovernightwaitingforhelp?Unreasonabletojumpoffaskilift?
3. Holding:whenyouactasareasonablepersonwouldunderyourcircumstances,youwillnotbeheldcontribneg.Her
religiousbeliefsdidnotgetherhere,soitsirrelevanttoconsideritalongwithotherfactors
4. **ForcedtransactionPosnerhatson:Thecityprobablywouldvepreferredhertogetoutoftheskiliftandget
injuredratherthanstaythereallnightandincurmanyunknowninjuries.
a. Lookatitasacontractualrelationship.Yougetyourselfout,wellpayforyourinjuries.Probablymore
ideathanthemfightingbutw/e
v. Kerrv.Connecticutco.

1. Facts:Deafmanhitbytolledbchewalkedalongtrack.Trolleysoundedhorn,deafmannotlooking
2. Holding:whenyouknowofadefectyoupossess,youmustactasareasonablepersonwouldunderlike
circumstances
3. Rule:someonewithaphysicalinfirmitymusttakeaccountoftheirphysicalinfirmitytotheextentthattheycan.
Havetocompensateincertainways
a. Cantputselvesindangeroussituationandexpectnothingtooccur
4. BurdenshifttoP!Trolleysoundedhorn,theyactedreasonably
vi. Davisv.Feinstein

1. Facts:BlindmanusingcanefellintoDscellar
2. Holding:Aslongasapersonwithadefectisusingduecareinwhichthestandardreasonablepersonunderthose
circumstanceswould,heisnotliableforneg.Weexpecthimtocompensateforlackofsight,whichhedidbyusing
cane
3. BurdenshifttoD!Shouldvekeptstreetsafeforpeopleofallcapacities

d. Special Talents
i.

298p.132commentd.
1. Necessitythatactoremploycompetenceavailable.Theactormustutilizewithreasonableattention/cautionnotonly
thosequalities/facilities,whichasareasonablemanheisrequiredtohave,butalsothosesuperiorqualities/facilities,
whichhehimselfhas.

2.

25

Thus,superiorvisionmayenabletheactor,ifhepaysreasonableattention,toperceivedangers,whichaman
possessingonlynormalvisionwouldnotperceive,orhissupernormalphysicalstrengthmayenablehimtoavoid
dangers,whichamanofnormalstrengthcouldnotavoid.
3. ifyouhavespecialstrength,knowledge,skillthatisclear&obvious,youreliableifyoudontusewhenappropriate
4. Physicianwhohasachildwithillnessandfailstodiagnosethis,ismoreappropriatehere.
a. Clearskillandtraining,andblatantlyfailstouseit
5. Courthaslimitsontheextentitswillingtocarveoutspecialstandardsforgroupsofpeople
a. Illustration1
i. Aisdrivingapairofwellbrokenhorses.Theybecomefrightenedandrunaway.Aisunusually
strongandcouldbytheexerciseofreasonablecareinusinghisfullmuscularpowerbringthe
horsesundercontrol.Heisnegligenttowardanyonerundownbythehorsesifhefailstodoso,
althoughamanofordinarymuscularstrengthwouldbeunabletocontrolthehorses.
b. Illustration12
i. Aisaphysician.HischildexhibitssymptomswhichA,becauseofhisprevioustrainingand
experience,shouldrecognizeasindicatingthatthechildhasscarletfever.Afailstorecognize
them,andpermitshischildtogotoschool,wherethechildcommunicatesthediseasetoB,
anotherpupil.Aisnegligentinnotrecognizingtherisk,althoughifhewerealaymanhemight
notbenegligent
ii. Fredericksv.Castora

1. Facts:TruckdrivershitP,Pclaimedhigherstandardbecausetheywereprofessionaldrivers
2. Issue:shouldcourtimposeahigherstandardforpeopleintheprofessionswheretheydrive?
3. Holding:drivingisntaspecialskill;everyonedoesit.Thereisonlyonedegreeofcareinthelaw,andthatisthestar
ofcarewhichmayreasonablyberequiredorexpectedunderallcircumstancesofagivensituation
a. Itsnotpossibletotailorthis
4. PP:tobegintovarythestandardaccordingtoexperiencewouldrendertheapplicationofthisuniformstandard
impossible

e. Age

i.

ii.
iii.
iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

Caveatforage:minorheldtoadultstandardofcareifengaginginactivitythatis
1. Inherentlydangerous(risktopublicand/orindividual)AND
2. Ifkidsusuallydontengageinthatactivity(iftheydo,weremorelikelytocomparethemtotheiragegroup
Motorvehicle:notfairtoholdchildtolesserstandard.Rationale:canttellifkidsdriving
Heavyfarmmachines:inherentlydangerousandusuallyperformedbyadults(debatable)
Purtlev.Sheltoncaveatforagerule
1. Facts:boyshothisfriendwhilehunting
2. Issue:isuseoffirearmsanactivitywherechildrenshouldbeheldtoadultstandard
3. Holding:Useoffirearmsinherentlydangerous,BUTnoengagedinonlybyadults.Holdchildrentostandardofcare
ofreasonablepersontheirage
4. Dissent:logicsuggestswhengunsareinvolvedweshouldholdtoagreaterdutyofcare;bulletisabullet
a. Needanincentiveforsupervision,moredangerinvolvedinyoungpeopleengagedindangerousactivities
thanadults
Robertsv.Ringselderlyheldtostandardofreasonableadult
1. Facts:Boyranintostreetandwasstruckbyoldman.Juryinstructedtoallowforageofkid,andconsideroldmans
ageandwhetherhesufferedanyinfirmities
2. Holding:Physicalandmentalinfirmitiesofanelderlypersonsarenottakingintoaccount.Dontwanttoholdthemto
alowerstandardofcare
3. PP:oldpeopledontwanttobetreatedaschildren,dontstripthemofrightsorresponsibilitiesunlesstheyare
creatingahazardforothers.Dontwanttodemeanthem
Dellwov.Pearsonplane/powerboat/motorvehiclesamestandardasadult
1. Facts:boyusingboatcausedDharm
2. Issue:Doesagematterwhenoperatingboat?
3. Holding:samestandardascars,onecannotknowwhetheroperatoroffastapproachingcar,planboat,ismoneyor
adult,andcantprotectagainstyouthfulimprudenceevenifwarned
4. PP:encourageparentstotraintheirchildrentoahigherstandard
Dunnv.Tetismallchildrenaretooyoungtobecapableofnegligence
1. Facts:Bothpartiesarekids
2. Issue:Doesagehaveaneffectonnegligencewhenbothpartiesaresmallchildren?
3. Holding:Under7incapableofnegligence,around714,presumedincapablebutdepends,over14burdengets
placedonminortoproveincapacity

62. RisksandPrecautionsHandFormula
a.

HFisacostbenefitanalysistodeterminewhenyoushould/nttakeprecautions
i. Onlyapplieswhenreasonablecareisneededanddutyhasbeenestablished
ii. B<PL

26

iii. B=costofpotentialDtoprovideprecaution
iv. P=probabilityofaccidentoccurring
v. L=lossthatwouldresultifaccidentoccurred(painsuffering,propertydamages)
vi. HarmcouldhavebeenpreventedifburdencostslessthanProbtimesLoss
vii. AVOIDINEFFICIENCIES!Putpressureonpeopletobehaveinamaximallyefficientwayifyouviolate,wereunreasonable
b. Ethicalexplanation
i. BurdenofriskpreventionisonD
ii. IfDdoesntadoptprecaution(actsnegligently)Dschoiceshowsthatheattachesgreaterweighttoowninterestthaninterestof
others(ethicallyimproper)
c. ProblemswithHF:
i. Hardtoputadollaramounton
ii. Canttakecautionbeforethefactorinjury,sodontknowtrueL(loss)untilafterthefact
iii. NeverknowrealprobabilityorhowmuchBisgoingtoprotect
d.
USv.CarollTowing
i. Facts:Bargeeleftship,sank
ii. Issue:whetherbargeownershouldhavetakentheprecautiontonotallowbargeetoleave
iii. Holding/Handformula:bargeewasawayfor21hourswithnoexcuse.Coisliablefornothavingbargeeaboardtoprevent
accidentsduringworkinghours.BurdenwaslessthanPxL
iv. FunctionofThreevariablesinformula
1. Probabilitybargewillbreakaway(P)
2. Lossresultinginjuryifitdoes(L)
3. Burdenofprecaution(B)
e.
Adamsv.Bulock
i. Facts:Trolleyline,boyhadlongswingingwirethatcameincontactwithliveswires
ii. Issue:whenanaccidentisnotreasonablyforeseeable,isapersonliablefornottakingprecautions?
iii. Holding:ifyoutakeallreasonableprecautionsandthereisnotaforeseeabledanger,youarentliable
iv. PP:ifcouldopensdoortoLhere,itmeansgettingridofalltrolleys,sincetheyusedeveryreasonableprecaution

f. Boltonv.Stone
i. Facts:cricketgroundaccidentonnearbyproperty
ii. Issue:istheclubliablefordamagesonnearbypropertywhenaccidentoccurs
iii. Holding:itwasforeseeablethatthiswouldhappen,butchancesweresmall,sopersongettingstruckwasevensmaller
iv. Testctapplied:whethertheriskofdamagewassosmallthatareasonablemanindspositionshouldrefraintopreventdamage
v. WhenPisveryveryverysmallfailingtotakeprecautionisnotblameworthy/culpable
vi. Notarulebalancingactlookat:
1. Likelihood,whatshappenedinpast,precaution,loss,iftheyreplayingwithhandgrenades
g.
Eckertv.LongIslandRR
i. Facts:mansavedchildfromtrain,died
ii. Issue:isintentionalexposureofinjuryconsideredcontributorilynegligentwhenattemptingtosavelifeofanother
iii. Holding:notwrongfulforhimtomakeeveryefforttosavechild.Hehadtoexercisejudgmentinshortamountoftimehehad
todeliberate,makehimnotnegligent
iv. Rule:thereissuchahighregardforhumanlifethatitsnotnegligenttotrytopreserveitunlessmadeundercircumstancesthat
constituterashorrecklessness
v. Forcedcontract:whatwouldRRpreferred?Hiringhimtosavehim=Posner!
1. Magnitudeofriskveryverygreat,principalobjectandcollateralobjectveryvaluable,makesriskreasonable=HF
vi. Principleswegetoutofholding
1. Importanceoflifecantputlifeatrisktosavemereproperty
2. Whatyouriskcannotbemorevaluablethanwhatsatstake(costbenefit)
3. MoralitynotirrelevantinthecontextdontwanttofindaHerocontributorynegligent
4. Rashorrecklessactionsarenotpermitted
5. Timecrunchdeliberationnotalwayspossiblesouseownjudgment,courtwillgivebenefitofthedoubt
h. EckertEconomicsdidheexposehimselftoanunreasonablygreatrisk?
i. Elementsofreasonableness
1. MagnitudeofriskasPhewouldbekilled/hurtverygreat
2. Principalobjectownlifeveryvaluable
3. Collateralobjectchildslifeveryvaluable
4. UtilityofriskPhecouldsavechildfairlygreat,hesucceeded
5. NecessityofriskPchildwouldnothavebeensavedbygettingofftrackhuge
ii. TrytoputinHandformula
1. BEckertslife,Lchildslife,P100%
2. Bctheresnoquestionthatchildwouldhavediedifhehadntacted,Eckertslife=childslife=sowash
iii. PosnerexpforwhyEckertcamoutthiswayhewoulddefinitelysupporttheoutcome
1. AlmostnaytortproblemcanbesolvedasK,byaskingwhatpeopleinvolvedinanaccidentwouldhaveagreedonin
advanceinregardtosafetymeasuresifcostswerenotanissue

a.
b.

Eckertgavethemachanceofkillingnoone!
RRwouldhavehiredEckerttoattemptrescue,soitshouldberequiredtocompensatehimexpost

27

i. TheMargharita
i. Facts:Manoverboard,bittenbyshark,nosurgeonaboard,wouldtake3weekstogettoland,decidednottodetour
ii. Holding:acuteanddangerousstageofinjurypassedbeforetheycouldreachportjustlefttosuffer
iii. Rule:allthatcanbedemandedofcaptainistheexerciseofreasonablejudgmentwithregardtogeographyandresources
1. Wouldhavesufferedhugelossofwage,time,etcfornotahugeeffect
iv. Reasoning:ifhalfdayfromport,unreasonable,buttheywerefarandalotwasatstake,roughseas,winter,timemoney
1. BtimemoneygeographydangerHigh
2. PprobabilityofsufferingHigh(ctappdoesntvaluethismuch)
3. Lprobthatlegoutcometurnedoutdifferently,(ctappthinksmoreimpt)0,probofsufferingisstill0,notworthit!
j. Complianceerrorsmomentaryfailuretotakerepetitiveprecautionsusewhistle/horn/signal
i. LapsesofcareDfailstocomplywithanagreeduponstandard
k. Durableprecautionshiringbargee,installingfireescape,runningwiresbelowground
i. Safetymeasurethatcanbeimplementedwithasingledecision
l. Wrightsrash/recklesscomponents
i. Somethingtotrytodecidewhetehritwasrighttotrytosavesomehting
ii. Courtsdontusehandformula,theyusestandardsthattakeintoaccounttherightsandrelationshipsamongtheparties
1. Youcanuseittoexplainoutcomes,butitdoesntdrivethemjustcoldcalculationscourtwontbeabletosupport
iii. Whatshouldcourtsrallybehindinstead?
1. Punishbadbehavior,rewardmoral
2. Takeintoaccountbenefitsofsociety
3. Takeintotouchyfeelystuff,moresothanHand
4. Allowmoralcompasstoguidethem
m. Davisv.ConsolidatedRailCorp(problem)
i. Facts:Pinspectoroftraincars,drovesamevanasothers,wentunderdetachedcar,didntuseblueflattoshowpresence,four
employeesconnectedanddroveawaywithoutsoundingwhistle
ii. Usinghandformula
1. B=low,L=$$,P=greatcouldhavebeenotherpeople,kids,etc
a. Whosmoretoblame?
iii. Wrightsarguments
1. Risksnotoutweighedbydesiredbenefit,notnecessaryforeveryoneinsocietytobenefit,havenotbeenreducedto
maxextent,sotheyareBOTHliable
n. Restatement3addsBPLasfactorstoconsiderinnegligence

63. Custom
a.

Whatiscustom
i. Whatisusuallypracticedinanindustry
b. Infavorofcustom
i. Predictability
1. Peopleadjusttheirbehaviorbctheyknowwhatthecustomisandprotectagainstrisks
2. Theindustryasawholehaslearnedsomethingabouthowtoconductpractice
a. Trialanderror
b. Becomemoreefficientwithhighestlevelofreasonandprecaution
c. Opposedtocustom
i. Companiescouldgettogetherandreinforceeachothersownsweetdeals
1. Letsnotenforcesafetyprovisions
ii. Holdpeople/businessestoalowerstandardthanwhatsavailable
d. Rulesforsection:
i. Customisnotdispositiveprogress/PP(TJHooper)
ii. IfP=0,NL(Ellis)
iii. Norelianceoncustomforhighlydangerousthings/activities(macdougall)
iv. Industry/Kpartiesrelyoncustom(RodiYachts)
e.
TJHooper
i. Facts:bargeslostatsea,TCfoundthemunseaworthybctheydidnthaveworkingradiostowarnofstorm
ii. Issue:isacompanynegligentinfailingtousetechnologythatsavesalotofdamageforasmallprice
iii. Holding:thereareprecautionssoimperativethateventheiruniversaldisregardwillnotexcusetheiromission
iv. Rule:ifaprecautionisavailable,andwillsavealotofdamageforamuchsmallerprice,thencoisnegiftheydonttakeit
v. PP:progressmakesindustrybetterasawholebuthastoberelativelyeasysolutionthatiswidelyknownof

f. Ellisv.Louisville&NashvilleRR
i. Facts:employerdoesntgivemaketoworker,over25yearsgotsickfromsanddust
ii. Issue:isitnegforcompanynottoprovidesafetyprecautionswhenitisnotgenerallypracticedbyothersinsamebusiness

iii.

28

Holding:iftheresbeenacommonpracticenottohaveaprecautionforyearsandyearsandthereisntanyrealknown
injurythenabusinessisnotresponsible
iv. Rule:Testofnegwithrespecttoinstrumentalitiesandmethods,isordinaryusageandcustomformankind
v. Rationale:lowb<(P=?)(L=high)costofmaskislow
vi. Lesson:iftheresabsolutelynowaytheycouldforeseeanoutcome,companybehavedreasonably
g.
MacDougallv.PennPowerandLight
i. Facts:plumberonroofgetselectrocutedfrompowerCosfuseboxonroof
ii. Issue:isDliablefornegwhentheyconformedtomethodsofotherlikecompanies,butmethodisstillextremelydangerous
iii. Holding:caretobeexercisedinaparticularcasemustalwaysbeproportionatetotheseriousnessofconsequenceswhichare
reasonablytobeanticipatedasaresultoftheconductinquestions
1. Reasondoesnothavetowaitonusage
2. Usagewillwaitonreason
iv. Rule:customarymethodsorconductdonotfurnishatestwhichisconclusiveorcontrollingonthequestionofnegligence,or
fixastandardbywhichnegistobegauged
1. Customislessrelevantandlessimptwhenitsclearyouredealingw/somethinghighlydangerousallbyitself
v. PPforcustom
1. Highdegreeofdangerrequiresahighamountofcare
a. Itwouldtakeforevertoimplementchange
b. Wewanttobeparticularlyvigilantandmakechangesthatincreasesafetyfaster
c. Esp.becausetofailtodosowillresultinalotmoreharm/injury
2. Ifyoucanseedangerbeforethefact,makeitassafeasyoucan

h. CustominContract

i. RodiYachtsv.nationalMarine

1. Facts:bargeownershitdockownersdock,theywereinKwitheachother
2. Issue:towhatextentdideachbehavenegligently
3. Holding:bargeowneranddockownerareknittedtogetherinK.thereareincentivestoadoptadditionalsafety
measurestokeepbusinessflowingtog.Bothfacepotentialliabilityfromthirdparties,soshouldminimizeliability
costsbyallocatingtheresponsibilityofsafetymeasuresbetweenthem
a. Judgeshouldntdoacost/benefitinthefirstplace,lookatresponsibilitieseachhadintheinstance
4. Rule:whentwopartiesareinK,orbothinsameindustry,customshouldbedispositive
5. Posner:mentionedHand
a. whentheresaKorbothinsameindustry,customshouldplayagreaterrole.Thefocusshouldbeonthe
partiesrespectivecompliancewithanddeparturesfromthecustoms.
b. TheyremakingtheK,theyknowthecustom,theycanfactorthatinbottomline.
c. Theyreintherelationship,canseewhatcustomis,anddecidetooptoutorprotectself
d. Sophisticatedpartiesinanindustryshouldhavealreadyaccountedforcustom
ii. Customandcontract
1. Compliancewithcustomisnodefensetoatortclaim
iii. Hypo:
1. TrainsuedfornotblowinghornandhittingPscar
a. Customisonlytoblowhornwhenengineerseesobstructionontracks
2. Trainsuedwhenluggagefallsoutofoverheadracks
a. Customisnottoencloseoverheadcompartments
3. Ifwemakecustomimptinbothcases,outcomeofhyposwillbelessliability
4. Whatsmorecostlyprecaution
a. Blowinghorncomplianceerror
i. Reallybigassociatedcostannoyanceofpeoplelivingbytracks,disruptive
b. Addingoverheadrackenclosuresdurable
i. Fairlyexpensive
5. Reasonwhywewouldsaymoreliability
a. Customerawareofrack,carontrackhasnoreasontoknowofoncomingtrain
b. LessLforRRinluggagecasebctheyenteredintoamutualagreement
i. Passengeris
1. AWAREOFRISKS
a. Canprotectbcmoreknowledgeaboutpossibilityofsomethinghappening
b. Choicetooptout,youhavepowerinKsituation
2. MONEYpassengermightnotwanttraintoassumecost,bcitwillbepassedon
a. NotsoforpersondrivingthroughRRcrossing(unlesstheylivethereand
dontwanttohearhornallnight
6. Situationswesayyoudontgetachoiceoflesprotectionforcheaperride
a. Buildingcodes,foodanddrug,seatbelts
i. Wesaywerenotgoingtoletthemarketandourtortsystemworkthisout.Wesettheseminimum
standardsinparticularareasbecauseweneedextraprotectionincertainareas

1.

i.

Poorpeoplebecomevictims,couldbearacetothebottom

29

CustominMedMal
i. SLrule:comparewithstandardinsamefieldandsamelocality
ii. Brunev.Belinkoff

1. Facts:Dgavetoomuchanesthesia,butitwasthenormalamountforcustomoftheirtown
2. Issue:shoulddocusesamecareappliedbyothersinarea,orcarethatwouldsufficetoservepurposeitwasmeantfor
3. Holding:overruledSLRuledidheactwithskillordinarilyfoundinthephysiciancommunity
4. ModifiedLocalityRule:
a. Properstandardiswhetherdochasexercisedthedegreeofcareandskillofaveragequalifiedpractitioner,
takingintoaccounttheadvancesinprofessions
b. (butconsidermedicalresourcesavailable)
iii. FeaturesofBrune
1. Questionisnotwhetherjurythinksheactedreasonably,itswhethertheythinkheactedwithskillordinarilyfoundin
communityofphysicians,eitherlocalornational
a. Compliancewithcustominmedmalisdecisiveratherthanjustevidentiary,bcofexperttestimony
b. manycourtslooktonationalcommunity(diffromSL,ormodified)
iv. Gambillv.Stroud

1. Facts:anesthesiacausedheartattack
2. Rule:Evenifdoctorsinsmallercommunitiescanaccessinfoaboutnewtechnology,theymightnotbeableto
useitduetofacilities.Wecantabandonlocalityruleforthisreason.
a. Notstrictlocality,incorporatessimilarcommunityreasonablenessofsimilarpracticeinsimilar
location,similargeographicallocation,sizeandcharacterofcommunity
b. Lookforappropriatecomparison.Ageproportionality,iftheresamedschoolnear,sometimesbest
treatmentisnotcities
v. Iftheresnewtechnology,atwhatpointisadoctorrequiredtouseit?
1. Untilisbecomescustomary,notrequiredtouseit.
2. Apatientmaygoseekit,butthatsanaffirmativeactontheirpart.
3. Whotellsthecourtwhatisreasonablebehavior?Expertwitnesses
vi. Johnsonv.WillsMemorial

1. Facts:Pstartedactingcrazyinhospital.Orderlyoutsideroom,ranoutwindowandfroze
2. Issue:isstandardofcareapplicabletosimilarhospitalsinsimilarcommunitiesappropriate(whatarefacilitieslike
thisgenerallyexpectedtodo)
3. Holding:localityruleappropriateincaseinwhichadequacyofhospitalsfacilitiesorservicesisquestioned
a. Protectionofpatientsisnotmedialfunction,justaserviceprovided,limitedservicebylocationand
resources
4. Rationale:standsfornotionthatcourtswillsometimesholdafacilitytoastandardthatemploysthemodifiedlocality
rulewhatarefacilitieslikethisgenerallyexpectedtodo
vii. Cookv.Iron

1. Facts:attynamedoneof3possibleDs.Psued,expertattysaidDfailedtoexercisestandardofcareofaverageatty
2. Holding:attyfromavastlydifferentlocalityNOTqualifiednottosecondguessexperiencedattyofthecounty
3. Rules:
a. Cantbringexperttodeterminereasonableness
b. Communityisrelevantindeterminingcustomlocalityappliesmorehere
c. Inlaw:geographymatters,demographicsmatter,localcustomsmatter,politicmatter,etc.youcantbringin
peoplewhoarentfamiliarwiththisevenfromwithinsamestate

64. ResIpsaLoquiturthethingspeaksforitself
i.
ii.

b.

c.
d.
e.

ObviousnegligenceofDcausedaccident
Theelementsofdutyofcareandbreachcansometimesinferredfromtheverynatureofanaccidentorotheroutcome,evenw/o
directevidenceofhowanyDbehaved
TESTtoapplydoctrine:
i. Accident/injury/harm
ii. Thing/instrumentalitythatcausedaccidentwasattimeofandpriortheretounderexclusivecontrolandmanagementofD
1. Hasnoapplicationtoacaseofdividedresponsibilitywhenanunexplainedaccidentmayhavebeenfromoneof
severalcausesinwhichDisnotresponsible
iii. Wouldnthaveoccurredabsentnegligentbehavior
TwotheoriessupportapresumptionthatDwasneg
i. Accidentverylikelyresultedformneg;and
ii. Partiesdidnothavethesameaccesstoevidencebearingonhowaccidentoccurred
Likelihoodofnegligence
i. Ifduecarehadbeenused,theaccidentwouldhavebeenunlikelytooccur
ii. Typeofaccidenthadoccurredbecomesmuchmorelikelywhensomeoneisnegligentthanitiswhenduecareisused
InsidejudicialmindRachlinski,Wistricknotontest,justknowgenprinciples

30
i.

Primarypoint:whenwelookatanaccident,weputtoomuhemphasisthatweknowtheaccidentoccurredbcwe
startwiththatandweighittooheavily
ii. Resipsahistoricallyincludesaradicalmisunderstandingofprobabilitytheory.Evenifeventdoesntordinarilyoccurwhenneg
isabsent,theventstillmaybemorelikelytobetheproductofnonnegligencethannegligence
iii. Problemgiventojudgesinvolvesinversefallacy
1. Tendencytotreatprobabilityofhypothesisbeliefthatifdeviationsfromexpectedbehaviorareobservedin
repeatedindependenttrialsofsomerandomprocess,futuredeviationsintheoppositedirectionarethenmorelikely
2. Gamblingthemachineisdue,atrainisduethelateritgets,etc..
3. Baseratefallacy
f. SLandResIpsa
i. DontaskwhetherDbehavedreasonablyinSL,wedoinresipsa
ii. Similarities:bothprescribeliabilitywhentheresnoevidenceofnegligence
1. inbothcases,Pnotrequiredtoprovenegligence
g. Restatement3rd17resipsaloquitur
i. ThefactfindermayinferthattheDhasbeennegligentwhentheaccidentcausingthePsphysicalharmisatypeofaccident
thatordinarilyhappensasaresultofthenegligenceofaclassofactorsofwhichtheDistherelevantnumber
h. ProceduralConsequences
i. PneednotputinparticularevidencethattheDshouldhavedoneanythingdifferently
i. Burdenshifting
i. GoestoD,soDhastoprovethatDdidntactnegligentlyandPhastoshowtheydid
ii. Rationale:itsintheDsinteresttowithholdtheinfoandnottellthejury.Tellservantstokeepmouthsshut.
j. HowdoesDrefuteit?
i. Proveactualcauseofaccident
ii. Proveheexercisedduecare
k.
Brynev.Boadle
i. Facts:PdrivinginfrontofDspremiseswhenbarrelofflourfellonhim.Nobodycouldtestifyastohowitoccurred
ii. Issue:ifthereisnoevidencepointingtoaparticularworkerofD,canDstillbeheldnegligent?
iii. Holding:Eitheryouwerenegligent,oryourservantswere
iv. Rationale:Flourdoesntjustfallfromsky.Whentheyfall,themostlikelyreasonisnegofpersonincontrolofpremises.Its
notforPtoshowtherewasneg
v. AppropriatetoapplyresipsawhenDhasaccesstoinfo/controlofsituation
l. HotelCases

i. Larsonv.St.FrancisHotel

1. Facts:chairfromhotelfellonPonVJDay
2. Issue:isahotelexclusivelyresponsibleforinjurycausedbyguest?
3. Holding:ahoteldoesnothaveexclusivecontrol,actualorpotentialofitsfurniture,guestshavepartialcontrol.
a. Itwasnotforeseeableandcouldnthavebeenpreventedwithordinarycare.Thereareseveralcauses(many
guests)
4. Rule:instrumentalitymustbeunderexclusivecontrolofD
5. PP:toobigofburdentomakehotelspostguardsateveryroomtoensurethisdidnthappen
ii. Connollyv.NicolettHotel

1. Facts:Pstruckwithmudfromhotelpartywithliveanimalandfreebooze.
2. Issue:ifthereisonlyonereasonableDcanthecourtprovenegligencebasedoncircumstantialevidence
3. Holding:differentfromLarson
a. Negmaybeinferredformallfactsandsurroundingcircumstances.Ifthereisalegitinferencefrom
establishedfacts,aprimafaciecaseofnegligenceismade
b. Hotelsbehaviorwasincrediblyunreasonable(freeliquorwithalloftheactivities)
c. Evidenceofneg(memofrommanager)notreallyresipsa,standardnegligencecase
4. Dissent:thisisaskingtoomuchtoputguardsineveryroom
m. AnimalCases

i. Braunderv.Peterson

1. Facts:PhitDscowonhighway
2. Issue:isananimalloosetheresultofnegligenceifproperlyconfined?
3. Rule:resipsaloquitureventmustbeofakindnotordinarilyoccurringintheabsenceofsomeonesnegligence.
4. Holding:Cowscanreadilyescapefromperfectlyadequateconfines
ii. Guthriev.Powell

1. Facts:CowfellthroughceilingonP
2. Issue:canDclaimdefensethathewasnotnegligentwhendefectinbuildingcausedharmtoP
3. Rule:infernegligence.Whenaccidentsofthissortoccur,theyusuallyresultformnegligence
4. Rationale:cowshouldnthavebeenonsecondfloor.Theyhaddutytoinvitee,sodutytoinspect
n. MultipleDsandinstrumentality

i. Wilsonv.Stillwell

1. Facts:Dperformedsurgeryonarm,becameparalyzed.Suggestedinfectioncausedbyneginnotsanitizing

2.

o.

p.

q.

r.

31

Holding:hosphadinfectionratewellbelownationalavg,butthisdoesnotsuggestthatwheninfectiondoes
occur,itstheresultofnegligence
a. Occurrenceofinfectiondoesntgiverisetoinferenceofnegligencewhennomorehasbeenshownbesides
aninfectionthatusuallydoesntoccur
ii. Ybarrav.Spangard

1. Facts:surgerytoremoveappendix,becameparalyzed,severalpeopleworkedonprocedure
2. Issue:canmorethanoneDinmedicalsettingbeliable?
3. Holding:ifPreceivedunusualinjurieswhileunconsciousduringsurgery,allDswhohadcontroloverhimor
instrumentalitycanbeinferredtobenegunderresipsa.
a. Dsmustshowtheywerentneg(burdenshift)itsunreasonabletomakePnameallwhowerethereandwhat
instrumentswereusedwhenhewasunconscious
HazardousActivities

i. Judsonv.GiantPowderco

1. Facts:Dsdynamitefactoryblewup,noevidenceorwitnessesbcitallturnedtoash
2. Issue:isanexplosionsufficienttoproveresipsa
3. Holding:anexplosiondoesnotoccurifpropercareisexercised.Sinceithappened,andrealcauseisunexplained,it
wasprobablylackofduecare
4. PP:Dshouldntbenefitfromtheirnegligentbehaviorvaporizingtheironlywitnesses(thishastoeveryclearyou
cantpunishafactorybcsomethingbadoccurs
Equalityofignoranceneitherpartyhasknowledge

i. Haasmanv.PacificAlaska

1. Facts:airplanevanished,noiceorstormconditions
2. Issue:mayresipsabeappliedwhenthereisanequalityofignorance?
3. Court:reasonforresipsaiswethinkDhasknowledgePdoesnt.whenthereisanequalityofknowledgethenyou
cantshifttheburdentoD.ButiftheresanequalityofignoranceyoucanstillshifttheburdentoD.
4. Rule:CANSTILLapplyresipsaifthereisanequalityofignorance.THEFACTTHATTHEDMAYNOTHAVE
THEINFODOESNOTPRECLUDETHEAPPLICATIONOFRESIPSA.
ii. Walstonv.Lambertsen

1. Facts:Plostatseaoncrabboat,whichsankduetounknowncausecalmsea,lightbreeze.Pclaimedboatwas
unseaworthyduetoextralargetank
2. Issue:ifthecauseofsinkingisunknown,canboatownerbeconsiderednegligent?
3. Rule:resipsanotapplicableunlessproofofshipsunseaworthiness(negligence)
4. Holding:couldntprovetankmadeshipunseaworthy.Noinferenceofnegabsentproofofunseaworthycondition,
seacontainsmanyhazardstherewasnoindicationofanythingimproperorneg,sonoresipsa
Anotherresipsatest
i. CanIimagineanyotherwaythisaccidentcouldhaveoccurredbesidesnegligencefromD
1. Ifyoucanimagejustoneothercredibleway,evenifnotlikelybutreasonablypossible,resipsaisnotappropriate
2. BcthisisaHUGEburdenofftheP
ii. Archibequev.Homrich(problem)

1. Facts:PandhitchhikersbodiesfoundingullyPsuedhitchhikersestate,
2. Result:manythingscouldhavecausedthis.Wedontknowforsureitwashitchhiker,socantproveresipsa
Resipsaandtypesofprecautions
i. Howisitpossibletosaywhetheraccidentprobablywascausedbynegw/oknowledgeofdetailsofhowitoccurred?
ii. Lookatcomplianceerrorinfailingtocarryoutrepetitiveprecaution
1. ResipsaandcomplianceerrorGrady
a. Wheretechnologyhasmadeanactivityunusuallysafe,thatsametechnologyhasmultipliedpossibilitiesfor
complianceerror
b. Paradox:accidentsinareaswiththemostprecautions/safetyequipmentarestrongestresipsacases(pilot
error)
c. Crabboatsareoppositeofplanesrequiredrateofprecautionislower,bcdangerrateislower
i. Primitivetechnologyhazardsleadtoitsdestructionw/oanynegligence
ii. Possibilityofcomplianceerrorloweratsea
d. Strongresipsacaseiswhenexpectedrateofcomplianceerrorishighrelativetonormalrateof
unavoidableaccident
e. Paramountpurposeofneg.systemistoregulatecomplianceerrorinuseoftechnology
f. Thoughtechnologymayreducethemagnitudeofclaims,itcanstillincreasethenumberofclaims
antiseptictechniquescreatednewnegligenceclaimagainstdoctorswhentheyfailtouseit

65. ButForCausation

i. Anactoromissiontoactisthecauseinfactofaninjurywouldnothaveoccurredbutfortheact
ii. Causalrelationshipb/tabsenceofduecareandPsinjurybutforDsnegligencethePwouldnothavebeenharmed
b.
NewYorkCentralRRv.Grimstad
i. Facts:Husbandoverboard,couldntswim,notlifesavingdevices

32

ii.

Holding:proximatecausewashisfallingin;therewasnothingtoshowiftherewaslifesavingequipmenthewouldhave
lived
iii. Rule:theremustbesomethingthatestablishesthatbutforDsomission(neginnothavingbuoys)theharmwouldnthave
occurred.
iv. Butforcauseofhisdeathwasprobablyjusthisinabilitytoswim
c.
Gardnerv.NationalBulkCarriers
i. Facts:Pwasmissingoffaboatfor6hours.Didntturnaroundtolook
ii. Issue:canaseamansdeathbethecauseinfactofmastersinactiontogethimfromthewater
iii. Holding:oftenseamenwhofalloverboardsurviveformanyhoursinthewatersubstantialbutforcauseisDsfailuretorescue
iv. Rule:courthastoholdthatcaptainwasneg,butnegwasnotbutforcauseofhisdeath
v. PolicyincentivesHAND
1. Probthatabsentaprecautiontherewouldbeaninjury=100%
2. LossofPslifeveryveryhigh
3. Burdenofturningaroundnotmuch,dayoffcourse
4. Theyobviouslyshouldhavetakentheprecautionandturnedaround
d.
Stacyv.KnickerbockerIce
i. Facts:DicecompanyhadPshorses,gotspooked,ranontothiniceanddrowned
ii. Rule:evenifnegperse,therestillmightnotbecausation=NL.Theremustbeacausallinkbetweennegligenceandharm
iii. Holding:fenceofstatutewouldhavedonenothing,signwouldhavedonenothing,employeesknowledgeofthinicewould
havedonenothing,
1. WhentheprecautionsDshouldhaveusedwouldhavenonethelessbeenunlikelytopreventtheharmthenNL.
e.
Haftv.LonePalmHotel
i. Facts:dadandsondrownedinpool,wifeclaimedfailuretopostastatutemandatedsignorlifeguardwasbutfor.
ii. Burdenshift:toDtoprovethatviolationwasnotproxcauseofdeaths.Inabsenceofproof,Dscauseddeathasmatteroflaw
iii. Holding:butforcauseofinjurywasNOTtheabsenceofasign,theycouldntswim!(butstillpossible,thiscaseishard)
iv. Rule:CourtfoundLforpolicyreasonstoencouragepeopletofollowstatutoryrequirements

f. Bernardv.Char
i. Facts:DentistleftholesinPsmouth,claimedDnegfailedtotellhimofhavingrisks
ii. Issue:ifdocdoesntinformpatientofrisks,andrisksoccur,wasthisthecauseoftheharm
iii. Holding:causationinaninformedconsentsuitistobejudgedbyanobjectivestandard
1. Whetherareasonablepersoninpatientspositionwouldhaveconsentedhadtheybeeninformedoftherisks
iv. Benefitsofapplicationofobjectivestandard
1. Uniformity
2. Easeofapplication
g.
Zalazarv.Vercimak
i. Facts:Pwenttoplasticsurgeon,aftersufferedseriousinjuries
ii. Issue:isitreasonabletouseobjectivestandardtodeterminecausationforelectivesurgery
iii. Holding:plasticsurgeryisnotaregularhealthprocedurenomediallysignificantbenefitsalternativeistoforegoprocedure
iv. Subjectivestandard!Becausenoexpertcanobjectivelyweighthebenefitsandrisksofwhatareasonablepersonwoulddo
v. Rule:forunnecessarymedicalsurgeries,useasubjectivestandard
h. FramingEffects:Twerski&Cohen
i. Peoplenormallyperceiveoutcomesasgainsorlosses,ratherthanfinalstatesofwealthorwelfare
1. Changeprobabilityoflivingv.dyingdramaticallychangesifsubjectschoosetogetradiation
ii. SuggestratherthanfocusingonPIdamagesfrombutforwhichseekstodeterminewhatthePwouldhavedecidedhadD
providedtheinfo,courtshouldIDandvaluethedecisionrightofthePwhichDdestroyedbywithholdingadequateinfo

i.

LostChance
i.

Traditionalviewofcauseinfact
1. PhastoshowthatsomeuntakenprecautionbyDismorelikelythannotwouldhavepreventedPsinjuries
2. Rule:ifapatienthaslessthana50%chanceofsurvivaltobeginwith(evenifdocusesduecar)thanontradviewthe
docsnegNEVERcanbeconsideredtobecauseofPsdeath
a. ItwouldalwaysbemorelikelythatPwouldhavediedanyway
b. ItsimpossiblefordoctodoublePschanceofdeathifPisalready50%likelytodie
3. Hypo:5%CODw/oneg.butifDisneg25%cod.
a. Thoughtotalriskwassmall,mostrisk(4/5th)wasduetoDsnegligence80%chanceDistoblame
4. Arbitraryapproach
a. Doctorsperformthesamenegbehaviorandifyouhappentohavelessthana50%chanceyoureoutof
luckvs.personwhohad51%chance
b. Byfailingtoallocatecoststoatortiousconductbctheyhappentobenegligentinfailingtodealwith
personlessthan50%.strikesatintegrityofcourtsystem
5. AllornothingapproachgivesDsabilitytomanipulateanddistortrules
a. Doesntdeterbadbehavior
b. Notclearenoughthere
c. Courtmighttrytobalancethisinjusticeinsomeotherway

33

i. Inflatedamages?
6. Howdoyougetdamagesintradapproach?
a. LikeWDlosttime,lostwages,maybepainandsuffering
ii. Lostchanceapproachalostchanceisworthyofcompensation!Neghascausedlossofsomethingvaluable!
1. Diddocsnegligencereducethepatientschanceofsurvival
2. Didnegligencemorellikelythannotreducethechanceofsurvival?
3. (languagechangesfromdiddoctorcausedeathtodiddoccausereductionofchanceofsurvival)
iii. Herskovitsv.GroupHealth

1. Facts:DfailedtodiagnoseDscancerearlyon,Pclaimedcausedchanceofsurvivaltogofrom39%to25%
a. T1:(cod)61
b. T2:75
c. Difference(T2T1)=14DOLLUPadditionalchanceofdeathnegligenceadded
d. 19%
2. Holding:areducedchanceofsurvivalisanactualharm(doesntneedtobemorethan50%anymore)Dsnegcaused
areductioninPschancesofsurvival,establishingnegcausedtheharm
iv. Hypos:(thisisnothowyoucalculatelostchance,itshowyoucalculateifyouNEEDlostchance)
1. HowtodetermineifyouneedLC
a. Step1,changeCOsurvivaltoCOD80turnsto20(BGrisk)
b. Howmuchriskwoulddocshavetoaddtobeneg?21muchdoublethebackgroundrisk
i. Soafternegligence,patientmusthavea41percentchanceofdeath
c. BGrisk=30%,dollopwas40%morethan60(double)soeasytraditionalanalysis
d. 1%to3%,BGriskis2%riskwastripledeventhoughitssmall,Pisdead!Liability
2. Tocalculateactuallostchance,youtaketheextradollopofrisktimeWDcalculation
3. Problem1
a. T1:5%
b. T2:25%
c. Easy!IfPdies,itsobvious80%chanceresultedfromnegdocincreasedCOD5x
d. 255=2020/25=80!
4. Grimsdad
a. T1:withprecaution(buoy)40%cod
b. T2:withoutprecaution55%cod
c. 15%differencethisisenoughundertraditionalview15/40=2121isMORETHAN50%OF40!
d. Soyoudontneedlostchancehere!TradviewworkswhenitsmorethanhalfofT1
5. LostChanceproblemsfromclass
a. Mark
i. T170%
ii. T280%
iii. T390%
iv. 9070=20(Time1,20/70islessthan50%sonorecoveryundertrad),Time2,10/70No
Recovery
b. Gloria
i. T130%
ii. T255%
iii. 5530=25/30cantrecoverundertraditionaltort
iv. togetWCcalculation,times25bydamages(786,450)
c. Rudy
i. T13%
ii. T25%
iii. 53=2/3needlostchancebcnotdouble.TogetWDtimes2bydamages
d. lostchanceneeded?
i. T180,T29515/80,needLC
ii. T130,T29868/30dontneedLC,tradwillwork
iii. T110,T25040/10dontneedLC
v. Whenyouneedlostchanceandwhenyoudont
1. WhentheextradollopofdeathismorethanBGrisk(riskwithoutnegligence,t1)youDONTneedlostchance,its
alreadymorelikelythannotthatdoctorsnegcausedthedollop
vi. Dumasv.Cooney

1. Facts:Dsfailedtodiagnoselungcancerearly.Experttestifiedifcaughtintimehehad67%COS,butnow1520%
a. 23%CODnow80%
b. dontneedlostchancebecausebackgroundriskmorethandoubledto47%
2. Courtsays:lostchancehereproducesmorestatisticalerrorsthantraditionalanalysis
a. Ifweusetraditionalwearewronglydenying33%recovery,ifweuselostchanceweareover
compensating66%,andunder33%
3. MOSTcourtsdisagreewiththisitsthefairestwaytospreadcompensationanddeterrencetonegdocs

vii.

WDdamages
1. Percentagetimes:
a. Immediateexpenseswithdeath
b. Futureearnings,orretirement,pension,medcoverage,pan/sufferingtofam(consortium),lossofchild
losingparent,
i. EGoriginalCOD10%,raisesto15%,dollopis5%5xwrongfuldeath
viii. Fennelv.SouthernMD

1. insteadofDhavingtopay100%whentherewasonly51%chancethathecauseddeath,weshouldreconsider
2. heshouldhavetopay%thathewasnegligent,51%,insteadoftotal

j.

34

AlternativeLiability

i. Summersv.Tice

1. Facts:3menquailhunting.Pgotshot,notsurewhichDcausedit
2. Issue:whocanbeheldliableifthereisnoproofastowhichDisneg,butoneDisdefinitelyneg
3. Holding:EachDisliableforthewholedamagewhethertheyaredeemedtobeactingtogetherorindependently
4. BurdenshifttoDtoshowhewasnottheonewhocausedinjury.JustlikeresipsaIfneithercanprovetheydidntdo
it,thenbothpay
a. Infoforcingrationale:ordinarilyDsinabetterpositiontoknowifnegligenceexisted,notreallythecase
here,doesntworkbcneitherDcanprovenonegligenceontheirbehalf
ii. Differencebetweenresipsa
1. Iresipsa,therehastobeproofthatitiscertainthatonlyoneDcouldhavecausedtheinjury.ThatDpaysalone
iii. 433A.ApportionmentofHarmtoCausesp.333
1. Aowns3dogs.Bowns2dogs.All5enterCslandandkill10sheep.Aisliablefor6sheep,Bisliablefor4sheep.
iv. 433B.BurdenofProofp.334
1. SEQUECEIfaccidentcouldveoccurredoveralongperiodoftime,Phastheburdenofproof
a. Ex.Warehouseanddamagespianoover3yearsofstorage
2. SIMULTANEOUSftheaccidenthappensimmediately,DsareknownDhasburdenofproof.
a. Ex.Injurywhencarwasstruckbytwodefendants
v. Illustration11
1. whileAscarisstoppedatanintersection,itisstruckintherearbyBsnegligentlydrivencar.Immediatelyafterwards
CsnegligentlydrivencarstrikesBscar,causingsecondimpactuponAscar.Asustainsininjurytohisneckand
shouldinthesetwocollisions.InAsactionagainstBandC,eachDhastheburdenofprovingthathisconductdid
notcausetheinjury
vi. Kingstonv.Chicago

1. Facts:2forestfires,oneoriginunknown,onecausedbyDsnegligence.FiresmetanddestroyedPsproperty
2. Holding:itsenoughthatPshowedDsnegcausedonefire.BurdenshifttoDtoprovethathisnegwasnotthe
proximatecauseofthedestruction
a. SinceDcouldntprovenotproxcause,andeitherfirewouldhavedoneequaldamage,verdictforP
3. Rule:theknownDcanbeheldcompletelyliableforbutfornegwhenotherDisunknownorinsolvent
a. UNLESSDcanprovefirewouldhavecompletelymissedthetargetorotherwasnaturallycaused
b. CAVEAT:theothercausemustalsobemanmade.IfDcanproveotherfirewasnaturallyoccurring,(and
theycouldproveit,andprovethatthefirewouldhavecausedtheexactsamedamage)NL
vii. Whyhavethiskindofrule?
1. Ifnaturalfiredestroyed,ideaisthatifPcangooutlookingforD,tryingtofindsomeonetoblamedontwanta
windfall,bcPwouldhavelosthispropertyanyway
viii. MarketShareLiability
1.
Sindellv.AbbotLab
a. Facts:DESdrugalotofmanufacturersoveralotoftime
b. Issue:mayaPwhowasinjuredbyproductofD,butwhodoesntknowwhichD,holdallDsliable?
c. Holding:evenifyoudontknowallpotentialDs,youcanstillholdthemresponsiblefortheirpercentageof
themarketshare.MUSTBEFUNGIVLE(exactsameformula)
d. Dissent:marketshareliabilityisntfairdisproportionatetomanufacturerswealthisunreliableindicator
offault
2.
Sandersonv.InternationalFlavors
a. Facts:Pclaimedoneof7fragrancescausedherbraindamage
b. Holding:becausePwasnotinjuredbyafungibleproductmadebymanydifferentmanufacturersand
becausePhasnotjoinedasubstantialshareofthemarketshecantholdanyonemanufacturerliable
3.
Smithv.CutterBio(problem)
a. Facts:Pallegedshereceivedbloodfromhospitalandgotaids,bloodcamefromoneoffoursuppliers
b. Whatresult:notthewholemarketshareofbloodsaleswhywouldofthecompanieshavetopaywhen
therestoftheinnocentbloodbanksdonot
4. Vioxxexposureresultedinheartattacksandstrokesonlyproofwasepidemiological,somereceivednothingand
somereceivedmillions

5.
6.
7.

35

Problemsofapportionment
a. Unlikecommonlaw,nowitslikelythateachDwillberesponsibleforonlyaportionofthedamagesthat
reflectstheirshareofresponsibilityforanaccident
DeclineofjointandseveralliabilityeachDpaysallofPsdamages
a. Followsdeclineofcontribnegallornothing
b. NowreplacedwithseveralliabilityliabilitylimitedtoaDsshareofresponsibilityforPsinjuries
ClassnotesDontrunwiththis!(usuallyneedmorecausation)
a. Harmmustclearlybetheresultoftheproduct,allDsmadeidenticalsubstance
b. Dsalwayshavetheopportunitytoexoneratethemselvesiftheycanprovetheydidnotmaketheproduct
c. MultipleclearlynegDs,seriousharmtoPswidespreadproblem

66. ProximateCause

a. RemotenessandForeseeability
i.

BasicPoint:Adefendantshouldnotbeheldliableforeverysingleharmfuleventresultingfromhistorturousconduct,rather,D
shouldonlybeheldresponsibleforthoseharmsthataroseoutoftheparticularrisksthataREASOANBLEpersoninDs
positionshouldhavebeenabletoforeseearisingfromhisconduct.
ii. EggshellDoctrine:extentofharmvs.typeofharm.Onlythegeneraltypeofharmneedstobeforeseeable.Theprecise
sequenceofeventsmaynotbeforeseeable.
1. IfPssuffersfromsomeinherentthatmakeshermuchmoresusceptibletoharmfromDsconductthananormal
personwouldbe,Dwillbeliableforthefullextentoftheharmcausedsolongasthegeneraltypeofharmis
foreseeable.
a. DefendanttakesPashefindsher.
b. Ex:JacktripsBrunoover.Brunohasabonediseaseandinsteadofsufferingminorinjuries,Brunobrakes
allhisbones.Jackisliablefortheextentoftheinjuries.
iii. InterveningCauses:
1. 2Types:
a. InterveningcauseisaforeseeableresultofDsnegligentconduct
i. Causalchainintact=Disliable
b. Interveningcauseisnotreasonablyforeseeable
i. Causalchainbroken=Disnotliable
iv. Exceptions:
1. SuperveningCause:
a. OnethatdidnotforeseeablyrisefromthereasonablyforeseeableriskscreatedbyDsnegligentconduct.
b. AninterveningcausethatisnotaforeseeableresultofDsconductthatoperatesupon,butdoesnotflow
fromDsactofnegligence.
c. Makesthecausalconnectionb/wdefendantsnegligence&Psinjuryattenuated.
d. Here,DisnotlegallyresponsibleforPsinjury.
v. NotSuperveningCauses:
1. Whennegligenceofothersisforeseeable.I.e.medicalmalpractices,negligentrecue.
2. Foreseeableresponseofothers.I.e.Unconsciousresponses.
a. RestatementSecondofTorts444:Anyactbysomebodythatisanormalresponsetofearorsimilar
disturbance,whichdisturbanceisaforeseeableresultofDsconduct,isnotasupersedingcauseofthe
harmcausedbysuchact.
3. IncreasedRiskofHarm.I.e.DsnegligenceleftPonthesideoftheroad.Foreseeablethata3rdpartycould
exacerbatetheinjurybycrashingintoP.
4. Unforeseeableforceofnature
5. CrimesandIntentionalTortsofothers(sometimesnotsuperveningcause).Ariseswhenthereisadutyonthepartof
DtoprotectPfrom3rdpersonsintwoways:
a. DsconductreasonablyforeseeablyputsPinanunreasonableriskofcriminalaggressionunderunusual
circumstanceswherethedefendantshouldrealizethathisconductcreatesanopportunity,temptation,and
inducementtosuchconduct.
b. AspecialrelationshipbetweenPandDgivesriseonthepartofDtousereasonablecaretoprotectPfrom
crimesandintentionaltortsof3rdpersons.
vi. InRePolemis

1. Facts:Psshipcaughtfiretoveryunlikelychainofevents
2. Rule:foreseeabilityisimmaterialifdamageisdirectlycausedbynegligence
3. Holding:ifyourenegandcauseharm,youreliable
vii. WagonMound1OVERRULEDPOLEMIS
1. Facts:Dsboatleakedoil,Psstoppedworkingforawhile,thenstartedagainandtheoilignitedPsboat
2. Holding:itsnotfairtoholdliableiftheresultisunforeseeable
3. Rule:theessentialfactorindeterminingliabilityiswhetherspecificharmwasforeseeable
a. NaturalandprobableconsequencesofDsactions
viii. WagonMound2

1. Facts:samefacts,Pherewasshipownerwhohadnothingtodowiththeoiloritsignition

2.

36

Rule:thiswasforeseeableharm,riskshouldhavebeenprevented.AttimeDacted!(dontlethindsightbias
hinderyou)
ix. Differenceb/wIandII:I:Pcouldvebeencontributorynegligentforstartingworkandthereforedidnttryhardtoprovethat
theharmwasforeseeablemakingDnotliable.II:Pmademoreofanefforttoproveharmwasforeseeable.Disliable.
Foreseeabilityisimportant!WagonMoundsoverturnedinrePolemisinwhichBankssaidIdontcareaboutforeseeabilityif
therewasnegligenceandtheresultwasdirect
a. Wagonmoundmandatesforeseeabilitywhendeterminingliability
x. Kinsman

1. Facts:Boatcameuntied,unmooredanotherboat,createdadamn,knockeddownbridges,floodedland
2. Holding:anythingbecomesforeseeableposthoc,lookatitatthetimeithappened.Here,ifdamagecangenerallybe
foreseeablethereisliability,Evenifthedamageisgreaterthanwhatwasforeseen
3. Rule:Unforseeabilityoftheexactharmorextentoflosswillnotlimitliability,ifyourenegligentitisreasonably
foreseeablethatsomethingbadcouldhappen
4. EggshellP!liabilityisnotlimitedjustbcDcantforeseeextentofdamages(vosburg)
5. Kinsmanrule:physicalforcesamesortthatcouldforeseeableleadtoharm
a. Wayinwhichtheharmoccursorextentoflossneednotbeforeseeable
xi. Restatement3rd29LimitationsofLiabilityforTortiousConduct
1. Anactorsliabilityislimitedtothosephysicalharmsthatresultfromtherisksthatmadetheactorsconducttortuous.
2. Boththeriskstandardandaforeseeabilitytestexcludeliabilityforharmthatweresufficientlyunforeseeableatthe
timeoftheactorstortuousconductiftheywerentamongtheriskspotentialharmsthatmadetheactornegligent.
3. Negligencelimitstherequirementofreasonablecaretothoserisksthatareforeseeable. Thefactfindermust
determinewhetherthetypeofharmthatoccurredamongthesereasonableforeseeablepotentialharmsthatmadethe
actorsconductnegligent.
xii. Doughtyv.Turner

1. Facts:cementlidfellintocyanide,exploded.Injurywasfromexplosion,notsplash.
2. Issue:isitforeseeablethatachemicalreactionwouldoccurctsaysno
3. Holding:ifdroppingthelidhadcausedasplashitwouldhavebeenforeseeable,butblowingupisnotforeseeable
4. Rule:iftheactcausesaforeseeableharm(splashwouldburn)thenL,butifitcausesaharmnotforeseen,NL
a. Looktothepurposewhatwasthecovertherefor?Nottoprotectworkers
b. Ifyougetaharmresultinginsomeotherwaythatwasunforeseeableandnoonecouldhavepredictedit
youdontmeettheunforeseeabletest,sonoproximateharm
5. Lesson:youcanhavenegbehavior,becausetheresariskofsometypeofharm.Butiftheharmresultsinsomeother
waythatwasunforeseeableandnobodycouldhavepredictedthenforeseeabilitytestisnotmetandthereisNO
PROXIMATEHARM
6. Note:justbcDdoessomethingaccidental,doesntmeanL;accidentdoesntequalLiability
xiii. ColonialInnv.Gay

1. Facts:DscarhitPshotel,severedgasline,causedexplosion,Dleftclaiminghedidntknowhehitanythingbig
2. Holding:thepossibilitythatcollidingwithabuildingwoulddisruptagaslineisnotfreakish/fantasticallyfarfetched
3. Rule:ifDsconductissubstantialfactorinbringingabouttheinjury,itsnotnecessarythatextentoftheharmorhow
ithappenedcouldhavebeenforeseen
4. **EggshellP!NegDtakesPashefindshim,evenifPseggshellresultinginhissufferinganinjurythatordinarily
wouldnotbereasonablyforeseeable
xiv. Diponziov.Riordan

1. Facts:Pwashitbycarleftrunningatsgasstation.Gasstationpolicyprohibitedcarsfrombeingleftonwhile
pumpinggastopreventexplosions
2. Holding:becausethistypeofaccidentwasnotamongthehazardsthatarenaturallyassociatedwithleavingacar
enginerunningduringtheoperationofagaspump,Disnotliable
3. Rule:ifPsinjuryisoutsidethelimitedclassofhazardsthatareforeseeableinthepolicy,NL
4. Note:notrainsonSundayoutsideofhazardthatrulewasdesignedtoprotect
5. PP:wewantplacestohavepoliciestoprotectcustomers,wedontwantthemtoremovethemsothatotherlawsuits
arenotbroughtfordifferentharmstheydidntpredict
xv. RatFlambe

1. Facts:workercleanedmachineswithgas,ratgotsoakedandlitheater
2. Holding:theinstrumentalityisforeseeable,eventhoughtheeventsareunforeseeable
a. Outcomeiswhybehaviorisneginfirstplace(eventhoughcommontocleanw/gasinthetime)
b. Trytosaythatthiskindofoutcomeiswhatmakesthebehneginthefirstplace
xvi. Steinhauserv.Hertz

1. Facts:DscarhitPscarandonePbecameschizo
2. Result?
xvii. CentralofGeorgiav.Price

1. Facts:DnegfailedtoletPoffatstop.Arrangedforhertostayathotelandcatchnexttrain.Hotelburns
2. Holding:negwasnotnaturalandproximatecauseofherinjury.Theywereunusual,andcouldnothavebeen
foreseenorprovidedagainstbythehighestdegreeofpracticalcare

3.

37

Court:whatdoyoudowhenyouveputsomeoneinaworseposition?Makeitright!Theydidthis:tookherto
hotel,boughtheraroom,nowthecausalchainisbroken
a. Ifshewalkedtothehotelandfellinaholeontheway,RRisliablebcshewasputtingherselfinabetter
positionthantheoneDgotherinto
xviii. Pridhamv.CashandCarry

1. Facts:DsclerkuntiedapanelswhichfellonP.putinambulance,driverhadheartattackonwaytohospital
2. Holding:lawprovidesthatifDisliabletoP,heisalsoliableforanyadditionalbodilyharmresultingfromnormal
effortsofthirdpersonsrenderingaid
xix. 457Additionalharmresultingformeffortstomitigateharmcausedbynegligence
1. ifthenegligentactorisliableforanothersbodilyinjury,heisalsosubjecttoliabilityforanyadditionalbodilyharm
resultingfromnormaleffortsofthirdpersonsinrenderingaidwhichtheothersinjuryreasonablyrequires,
irrespectiveofwhethersuchactsaredoneinaproperoranegligentmanner
2. Illustration1AsnegligencecausesBseriousharm.Bistakentoahospital.Thesurgeonimproperlydiagnoseshis
caseandperformsanunnecessaryoperation,or,afterproperdiagnosis,performsanecessaryoperationcarelessly.
AsnegligenceisalegalcauseoftheadditionalharmwhichBsustains
3. Commentdundertherulestatedinthissection,theactorisanswerableonlyforinjurieswhichresultfromtherisks
normallyrecognizedasinherentinthenecessityofsubmittingtomedical,surgical,orhospitaltreatment.Heisnot
answerableforharmcausedbymisconductwhichisextraordinaryandthereforeoutsidesuchrisks
4. Illustration4anegligentlyinflictsseriousharmonB.WhileBisinahospitalundertreatment,hisnurse,unableto
bearthesightofhisintensesuffering,giveshimahypodermicinjectionofmorphineindisobedienceofthesurgeons
instructionsandsoexcessivethatsheknowsitmaybelethal.Bdiesasaresultoftheinjection.Asnegligenceisnot
thelegalcauseofBsdeath
xx. Injuriesuponreturningfromhospital
1. 460subsequentaccidentsduetoimpairedphysicalconditioncausedbynegligence
2. ifthenegligentactorisliableforaninjurywhichimpairsthephysicalconditionofanothersbody,theactorisalso
liableforharmsustainedinasubsequentaccidentwhichwouldnothaveoccurredhadtheothersconditionnotbeen
impaired,andwhichisanormalconsequenceofsuchimpairment
3. illustration1throughthenegligenceofA,acollisionoccursinwhichBsrightlegisfractured.Bisconfinedtoa
hospitalfortwomonths.Attheendofthattime,heispermittedbyhissurgeontowalkoncrutches,andwhileheis
doingso,withallreasonablecare,hefallsandsuffersafractureofhisleftarm.Asnegligenceisalegalcauseofthe
secondinjury
4. illustration2thesamefactsasinillustration1,exceptthatBattemptstodescendoncrutchesasteepladderintohis
basement.Asnegligenceisnotalegalcauseofthesecondinjury
xxi. Berryv.BoroughofSugarNotch(problem)

1. Facts:trolleytraveledthoughDborough.HighwindscausedtreetofallontrolleyPclaimedDnegforkeepingitin
poorcondition,DclaimsPtravelingfast,inexcessofstatutoryspeed
2. Goodclaimofcontribneg?
a. No.nomatterhowfastacarwasgoing,itwasstillforeseeablethatthetreewouldfallandpotentiallycause
damage.
b. Ifbreakingthelawwasadirectandproximatecauseoftheaccident,thennotallowedtoconsidertree
falling.Butifthetreewastrulynegligentlykept,itwouldhavecomedownanyway,makingitabutfor
andproximatecauseofdamage
xxii. MorrisonTorts
1. Betweentheseextremecasesarecaseswhereunusualdetailsarearguably,butonlyarguablysignificant
a. Ifdescribedindetail,theconsequencesareunforeseeable
b. Ifunspecificconsequencesareforeseeable
xxiii. PosnereconomicsofcausationlooktotheeggshellPdoctrine
1. NegandcausationbutNLbcriskisnotpartofPL(expectedaccidentcoststhatRRcouldhavepreventedbytaking
Bprecautions)

b. InterveningCauses

i. Brauerv.NYCentral

1. Facts:DstraincollidedwithPswagonatcrossing,contentswerestolen.Dshadguardsontraintopreventtheft
2. Issue:whatistheextentofDsliability
3. Holding:evidencethatRRhiredguardsmadethemliable,provesthattheyforesawtheharm.
4. Rule:theactofthethirdpersoninterveningandcontributingaconditionnecessarytotheinjuriouseffectofthe
originalnegwithnotexcusethefirstwrongdoer,ifsuchactoughttohavebeenforeseen.
5. Dissent:thisisnotProxcausebctherewasnotunbrokencontinuitybetweencauseandeffect
6. Duty:obligationtoprotectPspropertyifyoucauseharm/injury,responsibletotrytofixit
7. WhenisDliablefor3rdpartywrong
a. Opportunisttheftthatyoucanforesee
b. VulnerabilityyoumakePvulnerableinapredictablewaytoacertainsetofharms
ii. Watsonv.KentuckyandIndianaBridge

1. Facts:traincarcausedgastospillonstreets.Manlitmatched,causedexplosion

38

2.

Holding:liabilitydependsonhowthemanstartedthefire.Ifitwasunintentionaltolightcigar,NL,ifhedidit
withmalicetowatchanexplosion,L
iii. Rule:Ifaparticularactofnegligencemakesamaliciousactmuchmorelikely,createsanobviousopportunitywhere
onecouldforeseeacriminalact,thenthatcriminalactisntthesupersedingcausethatseversliability.
1. Here,iftheycouldhaveforeseenthatapersonwouldnthaveknownthegasspresenceandlitamatch.They
wouldntbeliableifthematchwaslitonpurpose,becauseitsnotforeseeablethatsomeonewouldhavedonethat
iv. VillageofCartervillev.Cook

1. Facts:Dvillagehadelevatedsidewalk,jostlerbumpedPoffofit
2. Holding:negligentfailuretoproviderailingswasproximatecauseofhisdamage
3. Crowdedworld!ThisisTHEreasonitsnegtobuildunenclosedelevatedwalk.Inevitableandforeseeable
v. Alexanderv.TownofNewCastle

1. Facts:Pledmanofftojail,manseizedhimandthrewhiminapitcityhaddug
2. Holding:Convictwasanintervening,independenthumanagencythatinflictedPsinjuries
vi. 448.IntentionallyTortiousorCriminalActsDoneUnderOpportunityAffordedbyActorsNegligence
1. Theactofathirdpersonincommittinganintentionaltortorcrimeisasupersedingcauseofharmtoanotherresulting
innoliabilityforactorsnegligent,unlessactorshouldhaverealizedthelikelihoodthatthesituationmightbe
created.
vii. 449.TortiousorCriminalActstheProbabilityofWhichMakesActorsConductNegligent
1. Ifthelikelihoodthatathirdpersonmayactinaparticularmannerisoneofthehazardswhichmakestheactor
negligent,suchanactwhetherinnocent,negligent,intentionallytortuous,orcriminaldoesntpreventtheactorfrom
beingliableforharmcausedthereby.
2. Criminal,maliciousactivitiesofthirdpartiesaresupersedingUNLESS
a. Criminalactivityisforeseeable
b. Ifthelikelihoodofthecriminalactivityiswhatmakesactnegligent,thenwesayliabilityisnotcutoff
c. Ifitspossibleforthattortfeasortopredictthatthecriminalactivitywilloccur,
viii. SquibBaseScottv.Shepard

1. Facts:Dthrewfireworkintomarket.Twomorethrewitawaytoprotectselves,landedinPseye
2. Holding:anyinnocentpersonsremovingdangerfromhimselfisjustifiable,blameliesontheoriginalthrower
a. Thenewdirectionandforcestemfromthefirstforce
3. Rule:ifactsofathirdpersonarecompletelycompelled,involuntary,subconscious,therewillNOTbesuperseding
causethatcutsoffliabilitytoD
ix. RomanPrince

1. Facts:DhitPsboatandofferedescapebeforeitsank.Pdeclinedandwhenshetriedtoescapelater,hurtherself
2. Holding:thecollisionisnottheproximatecauseofherinjuries.Herstumblingcantbecontributedtothecollision
3. Rulewhentherewastimetodeliberateaccidentmightnotbeproxcauseofinjuries
x. Thompsonv.White

1. Facts:gasstationclownsdistractedDwhohitPwithhiscar
2. Issue:wasDactingundertheinfluenceofthedistractingthirdpartyclowns?Orwassheactingindependentlywhenhe
struckPscar?
3. Holding:itisforeseeablethatathirdpartydistractingtheattentionofmotoristsonthehighwaywouldcausean
accident,asnotafreeagentbutwasactingundertheinfluenceoftheclowns
4. Rule:ifDsnegligencewasaconcurringcausetoathirdparty,andnotanindependent,interveningcause,bothareL
xi. Supersedingcausemoreofacausethanoriginalcause.InterveningcausethatCUTSOFFliability.Itsupersedesthe
originalact
1. Goesoutsidescopeofforeseeability
2. Actionmadeinbadfaithmalice/grossnegligence
3. Physician/ambulancedriverperformsmaliciously
4. Pbehavinginwaythatisunreasonableforpersonwithimpairment(cantbewildandrecklessifyouretheP!)

c. Extentofforeseeability,remotenessandduty

i. Palsgraf
1.
2.

Facts:mannegligentlypushedbyguards,unmarkedpackagefellfromhishandandexploding,causingascaleon
othersideofplatformtofallonP
Cardozomajority
a. Duty:Guardhadadutyofcaretothemanhewashelping(notP)
i. Rule:Dutytousereasonablecareonlyextendstothosepeopleyouractionsare
beingdirectedtowards.
ii. Rule:Inordertobeanactionablenegligenceclaim,theremustbesomelegalduty
orobligationofthepersonagainstwhomtheclaimisbeingmade.
b. Foreseeability:GuardmusthavebeenabletoforeseeharmdonetoP.
i. Rule:IfareasonablepersoncouldnotforeseethepossibleharmtotheP,thenNL.

39
c.

b.

c.
d.

d.

e.

Remoteness:CausationcannotextendtounforeseeablePsbyunforeseeablecauses,because
thecauseistoofarremoved.
d. Negligenceintheairwillnotdo.Ifthereisnegligencebehaviorthatisntinrelationto
anybody,thenitscantbetransferredintoatort.
e. SummaryofCardozotest:
i. Negligenceisrelational
1. Limitedtothosewhomightforeseeablybeharmed(lookatlocationofP)
2. NotenoughthatsomeoneelsemightbeabletocollectagainstD
3. YOUmustbeindangerzone
4. Dutyviolatedmustbeadutytoyou
f. DANGERZONE:orbitofdutyyoumustbeinthezonewhileharmedtoclaimrelational
negligence
g. Need:AdutytoP,aforeseeableharm,andaforeseeablepossibilitythattheforeseeable
harmwillextendtotheremoteP.(whatisitcapableofdoing?Fireworks,bigdangerzone
firinggun,evenbiggerzone)
AndrewsDissent
a. Onceyouvecompletedanegligentact,yourdutyextendstoanyonewhomightbeinjuredthe
entirepublic.
b. Thereisstilltheproximatecauserelationship.Atsomepoint,wecutofliabilitybasedonarough
senseofjustice.
c. Wetraceeventsbacktoacertainpointandthenstopforpolicyreasons.
d. Mustaskwhethertherewasanaturalandcontinuoussequencebetweenthecauseandeffect.
TodetermineCardozosview,wewanttoseeiftheresdutybetweennegligentactorandP
a. WasPwithinthedangerzone(foreseeability,looktolocationofPandthenegligentact)
b. (onlypersonwithaclaimisPwithindangerzone)
TodetermineAndrewsview,askwhethertisrelational,oronceyourperformnegactyoureliablewithall
ofitsproximatecauses
a. Linetestwhenyoucommitanegligenceactyourebreachingadutytothewholecommunity,
Lstopswhenitsoutofthescopeofthelineofforeseeableness(anybodyhasaclaimiftheyhave
beenharmedprimarilyanddirectlybyD)

CausationandEmployer/EmployeeNegligence

i. Edwardsv.Honeywell

1. Facts:operatordialedwrongfiredept,firefighterdiedbchousewastooburned
2. Duty:tofirstresponders?Notlikeotherpeople,itstheirjob,holdtosamestndasprivatesalvor
3. PP:cantletthemassumethatkindofliability.Dontwanttoholdliableforirrationalunforeseeableharmsbecauseit
wouldbeaburdenanduneconomicalforcompanies
4. Holding:Acompanymustbeabletoforeseeharminordertobeheldliableforemployeesacts
5. Posner:unforeseeablethatfirefighterisactuallykilledinafire,ANDthatashortdelayincallingdeptcausesdeathof
afirefighter.
6. Negligencedispatcherproblemwithholdingemployersliable
a. PP,deterpeoplefrombusiness,complianceerror,handformulashowsthatthisistoohardtotrainagainst
everysinglecomplianceerror
i. Notpossibletoscreenandtrainhiresforeverycarelessactiftheemployerdoesnthaveforesight
totheparticularharmsemployeesmightinflict
b. Notservingthegoalofrespondeatsuperiorhere!SoNL
ii. Widlowskiv.DurkeeFoodsproofofnegligenceintheairwillnotdo
1. Facts:Dsemployeecleanednitrogentanknoprotectivegear,becamedelirious,bitofffinger
2. Issue:wereinjuriesattributableinDsnegligenceinfailingtoequipworkerbeforecleaningnitrogentank
3. Reasonablyforeseeable?Yes,Dbreachedduty,workerovercomeandcauseharm.(Kinsman=donthavetosee
exactharmandpreciseextentofit,justthataharmwasreasonablyforeseeable)
4. Holding:notastrongenoughrelationshipbetweenDandnurse
a. AnybodyundercontrolofDurkeeiswithinDZ.ButdidnotoweP,outsideDZofforeseeability,duty
5. Rule:NodutytoguardagainstthetragicallybizarreandLmuststopsomewhereshortoffreakishandfantastic
6. PP:Lwouldextendtoworldatlarge,bcitwasconceivablethathecouldveharmedanyonehecameincontactwith
Causationandrescuers

i. Wagnerv.InternationalRR

1. Facts:PandcousinonRR,cousinnegligentlythrownoff,Pandconductorlookedforhim,Pfellinthesearch
2. Holding:CardozoDangerinvitesRescue!!EVENIFTHERESTIMETOCONTEMPLATE
3. Rule:atortfeasorisLtoallwhoareinjuredinareasonablerescueattemptiftherescueeffortswerereasonable!
4. PP:encouragerescueattemptsthatarenotcompletelyreckless
5. Posnerhat:ifyoupaidhiminadvance,itwouldhavebeencheaperifhehadbeensuccessfulinsavingcousin
6. ProximatecauseNOTseveredhere.Itallflowstogether,becauseitsanimpulse(Squib)

67. StrictLiability
i.
ii.
iii.

b.

40

Actyoudonthavetoperformnegligently,youreliableifsomeoneisharmedbecausetheactwassoabnormallydangerous
CausationSTILLrequired!
PP:whywedontcarewhetherbehaviorwasreasonable
1. Ensuresthatpeopleengageindangerousactivitiestoactwithupmostcare
2. SLisinvokedwheretherespotentialforalotofharm
a. Compensateinjuredpersonmakethemwholeagain,werenotblamingyou,butyouprofitedfromhaving
thisactivitysoyouneedtopaybackhurtperson
LiabilityforanimalsLACKOFPREDICTABILITY
i. Typesofanimals
1. WILD
a. OtherwildanimalsSL
b. Bunnies,worms
i. Dontlookintowildcategory,dontconsiderethnicityorsex,ifitswildelephant,itswild
ii. Mustbeoutofcontrol(notmuzzledandlegbyaropeorinacage)
iii. Cantconsidersympathy,ifitstame,intentions,mensrea,etc
2. DOMESTIC
a. Notknowntobeviscous
b. Knowntobeviscous=SL
ii. Restatement3rd24ScopeofSLnowapplies:
1. IfthepersonsuffersphysicalharmasaresultofthemakingcontactwithcomingintoproximitytotheDsanimalor
abnormallydangerousactivityforthepurposeofsecuringsomebenefitfromthatcontactorthatproximity;or
2. IftheDmaintainsownershiporpossessionoftheanimalorcarriesontheabnormallydangerousactivityin
pursuanceofanobligationimposedbylaw
iii. Behrensv.BertramMills

1. Facts:midgetinjuredwhenelephantisfrightenedbydognotallowedincircus
2. Holding:elephantsarewildnotabletodomesticateit.Cantlookintowildcategorytoconsidertheethnicityorsex.
Cantlooktothemensrea(shewasscared,actingoutofselfdefense)
3. Rule:harmfulnessofanimalistobejudgedbythecategoryitbelongstoMUSTBEOUTOFCONTROL
a. Ifhesunderownerscontrol,andstumblesandinjuressomeoneNL
iv. Earlv.VanAlstine

1. Facts:DsbeesattackedPshorse.Keptinhisyardthatborderedhighway
2. Holding:ifanimalisnecessarytoexistenceofman(USEFUL)NLwithoutproofofownersknowledgeoftheir
dangerousnessPmustprovemischievousnatureoftheanimal
3. Soweknowthattheyareuseful,sonowlookwhetherkeepingthemclosetothehighwaywasunreasonable
a. Sincetheyweretherefor9yearswithnoproblemsNL
4. Cantbringabeeundercontrol.
5. Ruletodeterminewildordomestic
a. Usefulness!(lessliabilitybythecourts)
i. Domesticationmeansalotofpeoplekeepanimalforbenefit(studies,products,livestock)
ii. Onceyouvedeterminedifitsdomesticated:noSLunlessitspreviouslycausedharm
1. Orkeptunreasonably
v. Candlerv.Smith

1. Facts:baboonescapedgotinPscar,destroyedproperty,chasedher
2. Holding:whenawildanimalwithnopurposehasescapedfromconfinement,L,nomaterhowreasonableitwaskept
a. Keepitatyourperil
vi. Smithv.Pelah

1. Facts:SLfordogssecondbite
2. OneBiteRule(commonlaw)afteronebite,dogisconsideredwild,nowSLforharmitcauses.Ownersonnotice
3. NOW:ifyourdogbites,youpay!
a. Exceptions:abusedprovokedanimal,policedogsactingwithinscopeoflawfularrest,selfdefense(ifbite
victimwascommittingafelonyordogwasdefendingitsowner,vettreatingdog)
vii. Banksv.Maxwell

1. Facts:PworkedonDsfarm,Pstartedtodrivebullanditgoredhim
2. Rule:personinjuredbydomesticanimalmustshow2factstorecover
a. Animalwasviscous,mischievous,ferocious,
b. Ownerhadactualorconstructiveknowledgeoftheviscoushabits
3. Holding:bullsaretame:noevidencethatbullhadthreatenedattackbefore,orevidencethatDknewofitspropensity
viii. Vaughanv.MillerBros

1. Facts:ApeatDscircusbitoffPsfinger
2. MINORITYVIEW:animalwasrestrainedsoNL
ix. BostockFerariv.Brocksith

41

1. Facts:bearonleashscaredPshorse,Pwasinjured
2. Rule:wildanimalthatisatalltimescompletelyundercontrolownerwontbestrictlyliable
3. Analogy:horsedomesticated,spookedeasily,cancauseharmspeakstofragilityofhorse,notdangerousnessofbear
4. PP:ifyoumakethisSLforkeepinglawfully,youreessentiallymakingowningabearstrictlyunlawful
x. Bakerv.Snellgoitbob
1. Facts:Potmanandmaidbettheydidntthinkknowinglyviciousdogwouldbite,theylethimout,hebit
2. Holding:SLdespitepotmansinterveningact.Thepersonkeepingtheanimalknewhewasdangeroussoisliablefor
consequencesofwrongfulacteventhoughimmediatecauseofdamageisactof3rdparty
xi. Opeltv.AlG.BarnesCo

1. Facts:Pwentunderropesatcircusandwasscratchedbycagedanimal
2. DclaimedPwasinjuredsolelybcheplacedselfinfrontofanimalknowntobeferocious
3. Holding:evidenceinsufficient,Disliable
xii. ImpliedInvitationWalkingonapersonswalkwayisnttrespassing.Ownerhasdutytoprotectvisitorsfromdogattack
1. NL:
a. IfthereareseveralwarningsignedandsomeonecomesonpropertyAssumptionofRisk
b. Ifthevisitorhasreasontoknowthatthedogisvicious(snappingandbarkingpriortoentry)
c. Ifthedogsarerestrainedsufficiently.
xiii. Gomesv.Byrne

1. Facts:Dsdogbitsalesman
2. Dargueddogbitewasjusthazardofbeingasalesman.
3. Walkingupwalkwayforpurposesofwalkingtodoor,NOTtrespassinguntilyousendthemaway
4. Impliedinvitationifyouhaveawalkwaydefaultrule
5. Eventhoughdoggavenotice,ownerprobablyliableifheslawfullyonwalkway
6. Thisisverycasefactspecific.

c. SLLandUseRYLANDS

d.

i. Rylandsv.Fletcher

1. Facts:WaterescapedfromDsreservoiranddamagesPsmine
2. Issue:whetherSLisokforunnaturalsomethingbroughtontoDsland,itescapes,andcausesharm
3. Rule:landownerisSLforbringingunnaturalsomethingontoland,itescapesandcausesharm!
4. Defenses(1)escapeduetoPsfault(contributorynegligence)(2)actofGod,consequenceofasuperiorforce
5. RationaleforwhynaturallyoccurringthingisnotSL:itsnotfair!Youdidntputitthere,thereregardlessofowner,
windfallforP,Dmightnotbenefitfromit,orpreventit
6. Assumptionofriskonpublichighwayexposingselftosomeharm
7. Privatelandrightofprivateproperty,freefromnuisanceorintrusions,youshouldbesafeonyourownland
(UNLESS)theyacceptriskwhentheyreonownproperty
a. Clearlyidentifiablerisk(golfcourse)
Exceptions:
i. Thingsthatarenecessaryforhumans
ii. Loseev.Buchanan

1. Facts:Dsmillsteamboilerexploded,piecesflewontoPspremisesandcauseddamage
2. Holding:atthistimeinAmerica,noSLforthisandnotguiltyofnegligence,soNL
3. RationalewhynotanSLcase:driveupthecostofbusinessduringtimeweneeditindustrialrevolution.Pisnot
outofluck!Hecanalsobenefitfromtherule,anengageinindustryhimself
iii. Turnerv.BigLakeOil

1. Facts:saltwateroverflowedfromDsartificialpondusedforoilwells,damagedPspasture
2. Holding:notSLhere,notapplicabletoTX.Waterstorageiscontemplatedhere,partoflandgrants,
3. Restatement(f)extenttowhichvaluetocommunityisoutweighedbydangerousattributes
4. (d)extenttowhichactivityisnotamatterofcommonusage
iv. Lubinv.IowaCity

1. Facts:Cityrefusedtoreplaceoldpipesuntiltheyexploded
2. Holding:unreasonablepractice(notreallySL?)watermiensarenotextrahazardousbutwhenthispracticeis
followedtheybecomeinherentlydangerousandlikelytodamageproperty
3. Rule:Lwhensomethingnotusuallydangerousbecomessobybadpractice
4. Rationale:everyonebenefitsformwatersooneunfortunatevictimshouldnthavetobearthecost
5. Fundamentalgoaloftortsystem:compensationandfairness,makewholeagain

e. SLofAbnormallyDangerousActivities
f.

Rule:

1.

2.

Activitycreatesahighriskofsignificantharmwhichcannotbeeliminatedevenwiththeexerciseof
a. Reasonablecarebyallactors&
b. Riskisreasonablyforeseeable
Notamatterofcommonusage

42
3.
4.

Inappropriatecharacterornatureoftheactivity
Injuryflowsfromthedangerousaspectoftheactivity:
a. Mustnotdependontheactionsofpersonsotherthanthedefendantengagingintheactivity(notoutsideforces
either)
5. Dangeroutweighsthesocialandeconomicusefulnessoftheactivity.
i. 2nd519.GeneralPrinciplep.417
1. Onewhocarriesonanabnormallydangerousactivityissubjecttoliabilityforharmtotheperson,landorchattelsof
anotherresultingformtheactivity,althoughhehasexercisedtheutmostcaretopreventtheharm.
2. ThisSLislimitedtothekindofharm,thepossibilityofwhichmakestheactivityabnormallydangerous.
ii. 2nd520.AbnormallyDangerousActivitiesp.417
iii. Indeterminingwhetheranactivityisabnormallydangerous,thefollowingfactorsaretobeconsidered.
1. Existenceofahighdegreeofriskofsomeharmtotheperson,land,orchattelsofothers;
2. Likelihoodthattheharmthatresultsfromitwillbegreat
3. Inabilitytoeliminatetheriskbytheexerciseofreasonablecare
4. Extenttowhichtheactivityisnotamatterofcommonusage
a. Customaryforusasasocietydrivingcar
b. NOT:smallgroupsofpeoplethatengageinitregularly
c. Ex.Driving,swimmingpulls,sharpknives
5. Inappropriatenessoftheactivitiestotheplacewhereitscarriedon
a. Commonsensewanttodiscouragepeoplefromengagingin
b. Maybeitsvaluable,dontwantittobeunlawful,needsomeonetoengageinit,justdontmakeitin
Manhattan
6. Extenttowhichitsvaluetothecommunityisoutweighedbyitsdangerousactivities.
a. Usefulnesswecarebcitcreatescommongoodsforall,wantit,needit,dontwanttodiscourageit
7. PP:Shouldthislastfactorbeonthelist?Werenottalkingaboutshouldittakeplace,weretalkingabouttheharms
itcauses.Whyshouldthefactthatitsuseful,meanthattheburdencanbeshiftedtothePwhoistheinnocentvictim
whosufferedtheinjury?
8. Comments:notlimitedtoDsland
a. Maybecarriedoninpublichighwayorotherpublicplaceoruponlandofanother
9. Comments:abnormallydangerous
a. DangerofphysicalharmANDanabnormalone
b. Abnormaldangersarisefromactivitiesthatareinthemselvesunusual,orfromunusualriskscreatedby
moreunusualactivitiesunderparticularcircumstances
c. Essentialquestioniswhethertheriskissounusual,eitherbecauseofitsmagnitude,orbcofthe
circumstancessurroundingit,astojustifytheimpositionofSLfortheharm
10. Comments:commonusage
a. Anactivityisamatterofcommonusageifitiscustomarilycarriedonbythegreatmassofmankindofby
manypeopleinthecommunity
iv. IndianaHarborBeltRRv.AmericanCyanideCo

1. Facts:DloadeddangerouschemicalonRR,switchingstationnoticeleak,theyhadtopay1mil
2. Whynotneg?:hardertoprovethatDbehavedunreasonably(notmakerofchemical,dontknowproperties)
3. Issue:whethermanufacturerisSLforanharmscausedbyachemicaloncetheymakeit
4. Posner:ifwecomedownonSL,onceamanufacturermakesachemicalanditleavestheirhands,LforANYharms
5. PP:nobodyisgoingtomakeitifitcantbetransported,orpriceswillberaisedsomuchcostprohibited
6. Restatement:
a. truck=moredangerous,worsealternative
b. reasonablenesstogooutsidemetropolitanareas?Notracksalreadybuilt
i. reroutewouldcauseittobetherelonger,morelikelyforsomethingtohappen
7. PosnersWorld:duecareeliminatesharmssowhereduecareisntused,youreliableSLornegregime!Doesnt
matter
8. NothowthingsreallyworkSLisimposedonthingsbecauseitDOESdriveupcosts
9. Posnersbestargument:distinctionbetweenactiveandpassiveshipper(shipperv.carrier)
a. Shipper=manufacturer,carrier=transportingco
b. NorunreasonabletothinkmanufacturershouldknowaboutRRroutes
10. HoldingandRule

a. Shipperofhazardouschemicalisheldtoanegligencestandard(notSL)forconsequencesofspillduring
shipment)
b. SLisonlyimposedwhenthehighdegreeofriskassociatedwithactivitycannotbeeliminatedwithdue
care
11. Rationale:makingthisSLwouldpotentiallymakeeveryoneondangerouschemicallistimpossibletoship
v. Sieglerv.Kuhlman

1. Facts:gasspilledfromtruck,safetychecksperformed,girlscarsetonfire

2.

43

Holding:whengascarriedascargo,takesonuniquelyhazardouscharacteristics
a. ProofmightbelostingasfirePosnerflammable!Evidenceofnegdestroyed,goodreasonforSL
b. Obviouslyactivityinvolvinghighrisk,riskofgreatharmandinjury,createsdangersthatcantbe
eliminatedbyexerciseofreasonablecare
3. Rule:movinggasinlargequantitiesasfreightintrucksisSL(orwaterimpoundedinlargequantities)
vi. Millerv.CivilConstructors

1. Facts:straybulletfromDsfiringrangehitPridinginbackofatruck
2. Holding:useoffirearmsnottypeofactivitythatisultrahazardous,riskofharm(thoughgreat)canbevirtually
eliminated,utilitytocommunity,carriedoutinappropriateplace
3. Rule:SLisreservedforabnormallydangerousactivitiesforwhichnodegreeofcarecantrulyprovidesafety
vii. Sullivanv.Dunham

1. Facts:2Dsremovingtreesfrom3rdpartysland.Useddynamite,threwtreeonhighwaykilledP
2. Holding:PdidnothavetoshownegligenceonDsparttorecover
3. Rule:DynamiteisSL
viii. Crosbyv.Coxproblem

1. Facts:DsairplaneranoutoffuelandcrashedintoPsgarage
2. NegligenceorSL?Whichwouldgovernliabilityfordamageongroundcausedbyfallingplane?
ix. RestatementThird
1. 20SL
a. AnactorwhocarriesonanabnormallydangerousactivityissubjecttoSLforphysicalharmresultingfrom
theactivity.
b. Anactivityisabnormallydangerousif:
i. Theactivitycreatesaforeseeableandhighlysignificantriskofphysicalharmevenwhen
reasonablecareisexercisedbyallaction,and
ii. Theactivityisnotamatterofcommonusage.
2. ThisisverydifferentfromsecondinitsomissionoffsocialvalueofanactivityasacriterionfordecidingwhetherSL
isappropriate

68.

RespondeatSuperiorletthemasteranswer
i.
ii.

GenerallyholdsemployersSLfortortscommittedbyemployeesduringcourseofwork
Evenw/oRS,itsalwayspossibletoassertatradneganalysisforL
1. PointofRSisthatwherethedoctrineapplies,nosuchshowingneedbemade
iii. FormofSL,FormofVicariousliability
iv. HowcanyoumakeemployernegwithoutRS
1. Unreasonableinstructiontoemployee
2. Negligenthiring
3. Failuretoadequately
a. TRAIN
b. SUPERVISE
c. EQUIP
b.
IraS.Busheyv.US
i. Facts:drunkseamanreturnstodrydocksandnegleftvalveopen,sinkingPsdock
ii. Issue:ifemployeeactsoutsideareaservingemployer/isemployerstillliable?YES
iii. Holding:employervicariouslyliableforemployeesnegligentactsevenifconductnotmotivatedbyservinginterestof
employer,ifconductwasreasonablyforeseeableandwithinscopeofemployment
iv. NL:ifhewasntondrydock,becausethiswasreasonablyforeseeable,buthadsetfiretobar,oraccidentonstreetbeforedry
dock,orfoughtwithwifeondrydock(dealswithdomesticlife)
v. Twoparttestcourtapplied
1. Seamanwasundernoimpressinginturninghiswheelwaswithinscopeofhisduties
2. TurningoftHEwheelinnowayadvancedgoalsofUSgovt
3. BUTultimatelyhavetolookatforeseeabilityofit
c.
Rothv.FirstNationalStateBankofNJ
i. Facts:PgotrobbedwhenDbankemployeetoldbfmanwouldbeleavingwithmoney
ii. Restatement228:conductisnotwithinSOEifdifferentthanauthorized,beyondauthorizedlimits,ortoolittleactuatedtoserve
masterspurpose
iii. Holding:actwasoutrageouslycriminal,didntserveemployersinterestshedidntdealwiththetransaction
iv. Rule:unorderedandunauthorizedactsoftheservantarenotsuchtochargemasterwithliability
d. Restatement265GeneralruleforAPPARENTAUTHORITY
i. Amasterorotherprincipalissubjecttoliabilityfortorts,whichresultfromrelianceupon,orbeliefin,statementsorother
conductwithinanagentsapparentauthority.
ii. Unlesstherehasbeenreliancetheprincipalisnotliableintortforconductofaservantorotheragentmerelybecauseitis
withinhisapparentauthorityorapparentscopeofemployment.
iii. Examples:PfiresA,amanager.BeforePsEEsknowofthefiring,AtellsthemtocutBstrees.PisliabletoB.

44
1.
2.

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.

PfiresA,spokesman,andbeforeanyoneknowsofthis,AdefamesT.PisliabletoT.
PhasAappearashisservant.WhileAisdrivinguponhisownaffairsandrunsoverT,whobelievesAtobePs
servant.PisnotliabletoT.
iv. PP:Itshouldbetheemployersjobtoinformeveryonethathenolongerhasthatemployee.Heistheonewiththeinformation.
Thepubliclackstheinformation.
e. 220DefinitionofServant
i. Aservantisapersonemployedtoperformservicesintheaffairsofanotherandwhowithrespecttothephysicalconductinthe
performanceoftheservicesissubjecttotheotherscontrolorrighttocontrol.
ii. Indeterminingwhetheroneactingforanotherisaservantoranindependentcontractor,thefollowingmattersoffact,among
others,areconsidered:
1. Theextentofcontrolthemasterhasoverthedetailsofthework;
a. Moreauthority=moreofanemployee
2. WhethertheEEisengagedinadistinctoccupation/business;
a. Maidismoreofanemployeethanelectrician
3. Thekindofoccupationinreferencetothelocality:IstheworkusuallydoneunderthedirectionoftheERorbya
specialistwithoutsupervision?
a. Specializedcontractorislessofanemployee
4. Theskillrequiredintheparticularoccupation;
5. WhethertheERortheworkmansuppliestheinstrumentalities,tools,andplaceofworkfortheEE
a. Usesemployerssewingmachineorpersonalsewingmachine
6. Thelengthoftimeforwhichthepersonisemployed;
7. Themethodofpayment,whetherbythetimeorbythejob
a. Bytimeisviewedmoreasanemployee
8. WhetherornottheworkisapartoftheregularbusinessoftheER;
9. Whetherornotthepartiesbelievetheyarecreatingtherelationofmaster&servant
10. Whethertheprincipalisorisnotinbusiness
iii.
Employee
IndependentContractor
iii.
Morecontrol
a. Lesscontrol
iii.
Providesupplies
b. Ownsupplies
iii.
iii.
Longeremployment
c. Shorteremployment
iii.
Lowskillneeded
d. Higherskillneeded
iii.
Nodistinctbusiness
e. Distinctbusiness
iii.
Wages/salary/hourly
f. PaymentBythejob
iii.
iii.
Employer=business
g. Employerisnotabusiness
iii.
Supervision
h. Unsupervised
iii.
Beliefofparties
i. Beliefofparties
iii.
Regularbusinessofemployer
j. Notregularbusinessemployersin
iii.
f.

228Agency(adoptedfromRoth)
i. Conductofaservantiswithinthescopeofemploymentif,butonlyif:
1. Itisofthekindheisemployedtoperform;
2. Itoccurssubstantiallywithintheauthorizedtimeandspacelimits
3. Itisactuated,atleastinpart,byapurposetoservethemaster,and
4. Ifforceinintentionallyusedbytheservantagainstanother,theuseofforceisnotunexpectablebythemaster.
5. Conductofaservantisnotwithinthescopeofemploymentifitisdifferentinkindfromthatauthorized,farbeyond
theauthorizedtimeorspacelimits,ortoolittleactuatedbyapurposetoservethemaster.

69. Defenses

a. ContributoryandComparativeNegligence
i.

ii.

ContribanynegonPsside=nodamages
1. Rationale:protectDsfrombearingallL,whentheywerentattotalfault.
2. Newindustriesandtechnologiesresultedinalotofharms,allowedcttoerronkeepingcostsdownforindustry
3. NotwhetherPcontributedtoharm,butoftenwhetherpdidenoughtopreventtheharm
ComparLofDisreducedby%offaultjuryfindsonP
1. Rationale:whyContribisproblematic
a. Doesntservegoalsoftortsystemundercompensates
b. BurdenshiftDisbetterabletovoidharm

c.

45

Psheldtoahigherstandard,Dsheldtoamuchlowerstandard(doesntcreatesufficientdeterrencefor
unreasonablebehavior)
iii. Fourdifferentpossibilities
1. Purecomparative%D/%P
2. Purecontributory1%Psfault=norecovery
3. Modifiedcomparative50%rule(somejurisdictionscallit49)ifPismorethan50%responsiblenorecovery!
a. Equalresponsibilityallowsrecovery
4. Modifiedcomparative51%rule(somecallthis50)ifPismoreresponsiblethanD,Bartorecovery
a. Phastobe49%orlessresponsible
b.
iv. LastClearChanceDoctrine
1.
Daviesv.MannfoundationalcaseforLCCdoctrine
a. Donkeyinroad,Dneginnotslowingormovingoutofitsway
b. PcouldrecoverdespitebeingcontributorilynegligentifDhadasufficientgoodopportunitytoavoid
accidentatapointwhenPdidnot
2. 479Lastclearchance:helplessP
a. APwhohasnegligentlysubjectedhimselftoariskofharmfromtheDssubsequentnegligencemay
recoverforharmcausedtherebyif,immediatelyprecedingtheharm,
i. ThePisunabletoavoiditbytheexerciseofreasonablevigilanceandcare,and
ii. TheDisnegligenceinfailingtoutilizewithreasonablecareandcompetencehisthenexisting
opportunitytoavoidtheharmwhenhe
1. KnowsofthePssituationandrealizesorhasreasontorealizetheperilinvolvedinitor
2. Woulddiscoverthesituationandthushavereasontorealizetheperil,ifhewereto
exercisethevigilancewhichitisthenhisdutytothePtoexercise
2. 480lastclearchance:inattentiveP
a. APwho,bytheexerciseofreasonablevigilance,coulddiscoverthedangercreatedbytheDsnegligencein
timetoavoidtheharmtohim,canrecoverif,butonlyif,theD
i. KnowsofthePssituation,and
ii. RealizesorhasreasontorealizethatthePisinattentiveandthereforeunlikelytodiscoverhis
perilintimetoavoidtheharm,and
iii. Thereafterisnegligentinfailingtoutilizewithreasonablecareandcompetencehisthenexisting
opportunitytoavoidtheharm
v. Prosser,comparativeneg
a. ThetrueexplanationforwhyCNfoundreadyacceptanceinlaterdecisions,isthehighlyindividualistic
attitudeofthecommonlawoftheearlynineteenthcentury
i. Industrialrevolution,courtsfoundthisconvenientinstrumentofcontroloverjury,bywhich
liabilitiesofrapidlygrowingindustrywerecurbedandkeptwithinbound
vi. McIntyrev.Balentine

1. Facts:IntoxicatedDhitPsspeedingtruck.ShouldTennchangetocomparativenegligence?YES
2. Holding:inTenn,aslongasPsnegremainslessthanDs,Pmayrecoverdamagearetobereducedinproportionto
hetpercentageofthetotalnegligenceattributabletoP
3. 50%rule
4. irony?Partieswere50%sonorecovery
vii. Harrisv.MeadowsAlabama

1. Facts:Pdidntapplybrakeshardenoughtoavoidcollision

70. Damages
a.

b.

Twothingstothinkabout
i. WhenaredamagesappropriateatallWhatkindareallow
ii. Howdoyoucalculatehowdoyouvaluealoss
Exchangevaluewhatmarketwouldvaluepropertyat(generalrulefordamages)

c. Particularvaluetoowner
i.
ii.

Sentimentalvaluenotallowedbcpeoplewouldexaggerateandhardtodetermine
Butparticularvaluetoownerisconsideredwhenthereisaspecialutilitytouser
1. Prostheticlimb
2. Speciallytraineddogbutfamilypoochonlyvalueofchattel
3. Travellogkeptbyreporterwhowritesfortravelmagazine
4. Secretfamilyrecipeifyoureinrestaurantbusinessorgoingtopublish

d. Certainty
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.

Valueatthetimeofthetort
Doesntmatterif,attimeoftrial,propertyisworthnothingbcsomethinghappenedtoit
Butwhatif,attimeoftort,wethoughtitwasworthalot,butalterlearneditsworthless=lesseramount
Laterinfodoesmatter.Valueattimeoftort

1.
2.
3.

46

Whydoesnthavevalueunlessitshadtimetodevelop
a. Cropshadalotofpotential,interestinitmakesitASSIGNABLE,yougetmoneybeforehand,butthenit
wasdestroyed
Butifitsjustthatitwasvaluable,butthembecameworthless,youstillgetoriginalvalueyouexpectedbcitwas
assignable.
Rationale:dontcreatehugewindfallforPwhenitwasntworthanything

e. Avoidableconsequences
i.
ii.
iii.

f.

IfyouasaPcanavoidharmbyusingreasonablecare,youcanbebarredfromrecovery
YouareNOTrequiredtomitigateharmifitwouldcauseembarrassmentunduehardship,orbigfinancialsacrifice(likefalse
imprisonment)
Caveattoreasonablepersonstandard:
1. IfDcausessomesortofemergencysituationandPdoesntmakethebestchoiceundercircumstancesDcantcome
backandclaimthatitwasntthereasonablechoicetomake.Pisnotrequiredtobehaveperfectly

BenefittoPresultingfromDstort
i.

g.

Benefitislimitedtothesameinterest
1. Pecuniarybenefitcanoffsetpecuniaryharm
2. Butitcantoffsetpainandsufferingbcnotthesameinterest
ii. Rationale:notfair,notcomparable,maybeyouwouldntacceptthatmoneytosuffertheinjury
Hypo:Dcrashesintophonepole.Dsliabilityfordamagesisnotjustcostofpole,itstheutilitytocompany,customarybaseaffected,
paidovertimetogetitrestored,etc.

h. LostEarnings
i. CarpentersLandersv.Ghosh
1. 22yearoldcarpenter
2. jurywasfreetochoose,anddid,torejectexpertsfiguresinworth,got400K,insteadbchewasunemployedatthe
time,andhesmoked
ii. OilExecsPescatorev.PanAm
1. HighestmovingcontemporaryatBPwon14million
2. Affirmed,compensationwassimilar,andhewasagreatloverandfamilyman
iii. HousewivesHadiganv.Harkins
1. Valuingdomesticservices
2. Affirmedmethodusingexpertsshowingextenthousewifewasacook,plumber,chambermaid,etc
iv. Opportunitycost
1. Showingthatonedecisiontogiveup100Kayearjobtoraisekidsmeantthatbeingahousewifewasworthmore
than100Kayeartoherfamily
v. MitigationofdamagesBenwellv.Dean
1. Remarriagerule
a. Maj:survivingspouseremarriagedoesntaffectdamagesshecanrecover
vi. Hedonicdamageshardtocalculate,easytobeswayed
1. Painandsuffering;emotionaldistress
2. Noteasybaseduponanguish,hardtoprove
3. Moreflexibilityforattytopaintapicture

71. Assumptionofrisk
i.

ii.
iii.

ClaimsnotthatthePwasnegligentbutthatthePassumedtheriskoftheharmthatoccurredandthereforeshouldbebarred
formrecoveringfromD
Differencefromcontribneg:voluntary!Youputyourselfinthatpositionyouknowthepotentialharm
1. Contribneg,asPyouhaveamomentarylapse,anaccident,someinvoluntaryaccidentalcontributiontooutcome
SimilarPisseenashavingpartininjury.WeshouldputpartofblameonDthatshouldrelievesome/allofPsresponsibility

b. ExpressAssumption

i. VanTuynv.Zurich

1. Facts:Prodeamechanicalbullatabar,signedawaiver,toldoperatortotakeiteasybcitwasherfirsttime
2. Holding:
ii. Manningv.Barnnon

1. Facts:PtookskydivinglessonsfromD,givenexculpatoryK,wasinjuredandsued
iii. Andersonv.ErieRR

1. Facts:Clergymangotreducedfareticket,onbackwasclausestatingsincepricewasreduced,holderassumesrisks

c. PrimaryAssumption
i.
ii.

GenerallyadoctrinethatpreventsPsfromrecoveringforinjuriestheysufferwhentheyfreelyundertakedangerousactivities.
Incaseswhetherprimaryassumptionofriskapplies,thepispreventedformmakingoutevenaprimafaciecaseofliability
1. PrettymuchsayingDhadnodutytoprotectPfromharm,orDdidnotbreachwhateverdutyexisted
iii. Murphyv.SteplechaseAmusement

1. Facts:Pwentontheflopper

47
iv. Woodallv.WayneSteffnerProductions

1. Facts:producerassuredPthathehadaprofessionalstuntdriverforhisdangerousact,drivernegligentlyharmed
v. Cohenv.McIntyre

1. Facts:vetgotbitbydog,requiredmuzzleduringprocedure,andafterwards,dogbitheragain
vi. Neighbargerv.IrwinIndustries

1. Facts:Psweresafetysupervisors,sawpetroleumleakandtriedtocloseit

d. SecondaryAssumption
i.

AriseswhenDhasadutytoPandmayhavebreachedit,asanaffirmativedefense,DarguesthatthePrecognizedwhatever
dangerresultedfromDsallegednegligenceandvoluntarilychosetoencounterit
ii. Usedtobelikecontribneg,butmovedalongwithcomparativedamagesreduced,butnotprecludedaltogether
iii. Marshallv.Ranne

1. Facts:DsvicioushogattackedP.DclaimedPwascontributorilynegligentandheassumedtheriskofthehog
iv. Kennedyv.ProvidenceHockeyClub

1. Facts:Pgothitwithapick,arguedthatassumptionofriskshouldbetreatedasformofcontributoryneg,ajury
shouldcompareherresponsibilityforwhereshesatwithDsshareandapportionliabilityaccordingly