1orLs 1 CuLllne

Class 8/22/11 uevelopmenL of LlablllLy 8ased on laulL p 116

1orL Clvll wrong oLher Lhan a breach of conLracL for whlch Lhe law provldes a remedy 1hls area of law
lmposes duLles on persons Lo acL ln a manner LhaL wlll noL ln[ure oLher persons
A person who breaches a LorL duLy has commlLLed a LorL and may be llable Lo pay damages ln a
law sulL broughL by a person ln[ured because of LhaL LorL
Ma[or purposes of LorL law
1) 1o provlde a peaceful means for ad[usLlng Lhe rlghLs of parLles who mlghL oLherwlse Lake
law lnLo Lhelr own hands"
2) 1o deLer wrongful conducL
3) 1o encourage soclally responslble behavlor
4) 1o resLore ln[ured parLles Lo orlglnal condlLlon by compensaLlng Lhem for Lhelr ln[urles
3) 1o vlndlcaLe lndlvldual rlghLs of redress
LlablllLy wlLhouL faulL Lo llablllLy based on faulL
-o faulL perlods v faulL based perlods
1wo common law wrlLs are Lhe genesls of LorL law
1 1he wrlL of Lrespass flrsL prlmarlly LhaL Lhe punlshmenL of Lhe crlme
LaLer added saLlsfacLlon of Lhe ln[ured parLy's clalm for redress
2 WrlL of Lrespass on Lhe clalm pracLlce of applylng Lo Lhe Chancellor ln whlch no wrlL could
be found ln Lhe 8eglsLer Lo cover Lhe lalnLlff's clalm
ueveloped ouL of Lhe acLlon on Lhe Case nulsance converslon decelL defamaLlon mallclous
prosecuLlon lnLerference wlLh economlc relaLlons and modern acLlon for negllgence
1respass dlrecL and forclble ln[urles
Case oLher Langlble ln[urles Lo person or properLy (p4)
SLrlcL llablllLy legal responslblllLy
AcLual lnLenL blame worLhy


1ort Cr|me
rlvaLe/personal wrong
lndlvldual seek/pursues remedy
lndlvldual beneflLs
uamages pald
ubllc/soclal wrong
SLaLe/publlc enLlLy pursues redress or remedy
SocleLy beneflLs
unlshmenL (socleLy's condemnaLlon


Pulle v Crynge 1466 (1he Case of 1hornsLlmber falls)
Summarlzlng accepLed law from early Lngllsh law of LorLs
ln[ured wlLhouL lnLenL
SLrlcL responslblllLy
Llable wlLh or wlLhouL lnLenL
Larly common law aLLlLude
1respass ln case ls crlmlnal ln naLure musL prove damages copablllLy noL lnLenL negllgence
1respass noL have Lo prove lnLenLlonal damages C|ar|fy these (c|ass notes not c|ear)
weovet v wotJ 1616 (soldlers)
lssue does Lhe unlnLenLlonal acL of shooLlng someone whlle sklrmlshlng wlLh gun consLlLuLe a
felony?
8ule ln[urlng someone wlLh or wlLhouL a felonlous mlnd ls noL consldered a felony
1respass of assaulL and baLLery noL a felony no negllgence noL llable
Legally responslble sLrlcL llablllLy
*lmporLance courL saylng now LhaL Lhey are progresslng (from prevlous case) Lo Lhe LhoughL
LhaL noL always responslble
Lhe LhoughL of change
recognlze
mlLlgaLe
burden of proof brlng acLlon for ln[ury sLlll have burden Lo prove noL aL faulL
towo v keoJoll 1830 (breaklng up dog flghL)
lssue should A be held responslble under Lrespass or case and pay remedy?
8ule Lvldence musL show lnLenL was unlawful or A was ln faulL Lo be held llable
lmporLance (p 8) quesLlon how far are we golng Lo go ln Lerms of llablllLy?
LarllesL sLaLemenL or case LhaL llablllLy ls based on faulL
lnLenLlonal LorL v negllgence headlng Lowards Lhls progresslon
uuLy/necesslLy Lo acL or acLlng lawfully? v duLy Lo acL/lawful acL/exLraordlnary care?
rogresslon zero ln on negllgence
obeo v letty 1933 (falnLed whlle drlvlng)
lssue uoes a sudden lllness ln whlch Lhe A has never experlenced consLlLuLe negllgence? Was
Lrlal courL [usLlfled ln lLs rullng?
8ule when one ls suddenly overcame wlLh unanLlclpaLed lllness whlle drlvlng and becomes
unable Lo conLrol one ls noL held negllgenL
vollLlonal acL?
ooo v letlol ot 1969 (blasLlng)
lssue uoes properLy damage caused by blasLlng on nearby properLy consLlLuLe acLlon for
damage wlLhouL negllgence?
8ule (revlous proof of negllgence ls requlred unless blasL was accompanled by acLual physlcal
lnvaslon of damaged properLy) CurrenL Lhe lnLenLlonal blasLlng ln an area capable of harmlng
nearby properLy resulLs ln absoluLe llablllLy
8aLlonale can'L wlLhsLand analysls
revlous law musL esLabllsh negllgence
AbsoluLe or sLrlcL llablllLy? WhaL musL Lhey prove?
-oL negllgence LhaL blasL caused LhaL damage"

Class 2 8/24/11 lnLenL p 1724

ottott v uolley 1933 ( 3 yr old moved chalr)
lssue WheLher Lhe lnfanL A lnLended Lo harm Lhe and ls Lherefore llable for resulLlng
damages?
8ule1 8aLLery requlres Lhe lnLenLlonal lnfllcLlon" of harmful bodlly conLacL
8ule 2 8esL 13 characLer of acLor's lnLenLlon lf Lhe acLor causes Lhe harmful conLacL knowlng
LhaL such conLacL or apprehenslon ls subsLanLlally cerLaln Lo be produced" Lhen Lhe acLor
lnLended harmful conLacL AddlLlonally Lhe commenL sLaLes LhaL lL ls noL enough for Lhe acL Lo
be done lnLenLlonally even Lhough Lhe acLor reallzes or should reallze LhaL lL conLalns a very
grave rlsk of brlnglng abouL Lhe conLacL" 8aLher he musL reallze wlLh subsLanLlal cerLalnLy"
LhaL Lhe conLacL wlll resulL and Lherefore be llable
lnLenL purpose or knowledge Lo a subsLanLlal cerLalnLy (grave rlsk ls noL enough)
1orL baLLery offenslve Louchlng
courL anLlclpaLlng Lhey were wrong"
SubsLanLlal cerLalnLy doesn'L have Lo be cerLaln of a speclflc resulL [usL cerLaln Lhere wlll be an
offenslve conLacL
AcL could be a LorL and noL a crlme/ crlme buL noL a LorL
SLaLes have a cap on age for crlmlnal capaclLy
1he supervlsor of Lhe 3 yr old could be llable negllgenL supervlslon
lnLenL does noL have Lo have Lo be mallce ln[ury or bad moLlve [usL has Lo have knowledge of
subsLanLlal cerLalnLy
Age ls noL a facLor for llablllLy


lvey v ottoqllo 1972 (A hugged causlng exLreme ln[ury)
lssue wheLher under llorlda common law A's conducL was baLLery? (lf yes" cannoL
malnLaln her acLlon because sulL would be barred based on Lhe Lwoyr sLaLuLe lf no" could
malnLaln her acLlon on a counL of negllgence)
8ule1 an assaulL and baLLery ls noL negllgence for such an acLlon ln lnLenLlonal whlle
negllgence connoLes an unlnLenLlonal acL
8ule 2 a reasonable man musL belleve LhaL a resulL was subsLanLlally cerLaln Lo occur ln order
for hlm Lo lnLend lL
8ule 3 knowledge and appreclaLlon of a rlsk shorL of subsLanLlal cerLalnLy ls noL Lhe equlvalenL
of lnLenL"
Summary [udgmenL courL flnds for Lhe A before Lhe evldence ls provlded Lo Lhe [ury
SLaLuLe of llmlLaLlons llmlLaLlon on Lhe amounL of Llme you can Lake acLlon
AlLernaLlve Lheorles of [udgmenL can'L be boLh
Sub[ecLlve speclflc person ob[ecLlve reasonable person
otty gave us LhaL lnLenL ls purpose or knowledge" lvey says lnLenL ls purpose or
knowledge of parLlcular harm or offenslve conLacL"

Class 3 8/26/11 lnLenL conL p 2430

koosoo v kltoet 1889 (kllled dog whlle hunLlng)
lssue under llllnols common law are A's llable for damages caused by a mlsLake" LhaL A's dld
noL lnLend"?
8ule ?es As are llable for damages caused by Lhelr mlsLake desplLe noL lnLendlng Lo klll Lhe dog
MlsLake noL accldenL because A dld lnLenL Lo klll Lhe anlmal noL an accldenL because accldenL
assumes lack of lnLenL
1ransferred lnLenL noL mlsLake because A shoL whaL he almed for wheLher or noL lL Lurned ouL
Lo be Lhe rlghL anlmal
Cood falLh and mlsLake are noL lnLenLs
eople can be llable wlLhouL belng morally blameworLhy"
MlsLakes negaLe lnLenL when Lhey are abouL Lhe legally relevanL consequences mlsLakes abouL
anyLhlng else do noL negaLe lnLenL
,nlte v Almy 1937 (menLally lll)
lssue under MassachuseLLs common law ls an lnsane person llable for LorLs agalnsL Lhelr
careLaker?
8ule yes An lnsane person by hls acL does lnLenLlonal damages Lo Lhe person or properLy of
anoLher he llable for LhaL damage ln Lhe same clrcumsLances ln whlch a normal person would be
llable
ubllc pollcy a rule lmposlng llablllLy Lends Lo make Lhe people ln charge of Lhe lnsane person
more waLchful
CourLs say ln Lhe broadesL Lerms LhaL an lnsane person ls llable for hls LorLs"
laulL ls noL a prerequlslLe Lo llablllLy
@olmoqe v mltb 1894 (klds on roof)
lssue Can a person be llable for an lnLenLlonal LorL when Lhe LorL was noL lnLended for Lhe
buL for anoLher person?
8ule ?es lf A lnLends Lo hlL a boy uslng unreasonable for under Lhe clrcumsLances" Lhen he ls
commlLLlng an unlawful acL As such A ls llable wheLher he hlL who he almed for or anoLher
1ransferred lnLenL when a A lnLends any one of Lhe flve Lrespass" LorLs (baLLery assaulL false
lmprlsonmenL Lrespass Lo land and Lrespass Lo chaLLels) and accldenLally accompllshes any one
of Lhem Lhe A ls llable
MlsLakes as Lo consequence negaLes lnLenL
MlsLakes as Lo Lhe slgnlflcance of Lhe one's acLlons or Lhe clrcumsLances ln whlch one acLs does
noL negaLe lnLenL
WhaL Lype of mlsLake dld SmlLh make?
MlsLake as Lo consequence 1herefore we musL change Lhe deflnlLlon
4 MlsLakes as Lo consequences LhaL do -C1 lndlcaLe a dlsposlLlon commlL an
lnLenLlonal LorL negaLe lnLenL
4 MlsLakes as Lo consequences LhaL lndlcaLe a dlsposlLlon commlL an lnLenLlonal LorL
do -C1 negaLe lnLenL
lnLenL requlres
A consclous acL A-u
WlLher purpose Lo produce Lhe legally relevanL consequences or Lhe knowledge LhaL Lhe
legally relevanL consequences are subsLanLlally cerLaln Lo occur
4 ottott v uolley

Class 4 8/29/11 8aLLery p 3037

Cole v 1urner 1704
lssue wheLher Lhe leasL amounL of Louchlng when done ln anger saLlsfles Lhe necessary
elemenL of baLLery?
8ule erson ls llable lf he causes Lhe harmful/offenslve conLacL lnLenL was noL requlred aL Lhls
Llme
roLecLs dlgnlLy wlLh compensaLlon and granLs money for ln[ury
Larly common law had Lo be some anger lnvolved ln Lhe Louchlng
8aLLery
Crlmlnal lnLenLlonal Louchlng wlLhouL consenL
Clvll lnLenLlonal LorL of unwanLed Louch
1orLs
-omlnal
underlylng prlnclple of LorL ln baLLery proLecLlng hyslcal auLonomy
Wallace v 8osen 2002 (Leacher and flre drlll)
lssue wheLher Lhe courL erred ln
8efuslng Lo glve [ury lnsLrucLlon regardlng baLLery LhaL requesLed
lnsLrucLlng Lhe [ury regardlng Lhe defense of lncurred rlsk
Poldlng/rule CourL dld noL err clrcumsLances affecL unpermlLLed characLer
knowledge and appreclaLlon ls noL lnLenL
Crowded world noL reckless
Looklng aL Lhe more modern vlew
lnLenLlonal Louchlng ln a harmful/offenslve manner
32 deflnes baLLery and lnLenL
8esLaLemenL 34
est 13 8attery narmfu| contact
4 an acLor ls sub[ecL Lo llablllLy Lo anoLher for baLLery lf
a) Pe acLs lnLendlng Lo cause a harmful or offenslve conLacL wlLh Lhe person of Lhe
oLher or Lhlrd person or an lmmlnenL apprehenslon of such a conLacL and
b) A harmful conLacL wlLh Lhe person of Lhe oLher dlrecLly or lndlrecLly resulLs"
8esL 18 Cffenslve conLacL
1 An acLor ls sub[ecL Lo llablllLy Lo anoLher for baLLery lf
a) Pe acLs lnLendlng Lo cause a harmful or offenslve conLacL wlLh Lhe person of Lhe
oLher or a Lhlrd person or an lmmlnenL apprehenslon of such a conLacL and
b) An offenslve conLacL wlLh Lhe person of Lhe oLher dlrecLly or lndlrecLly resulLs
2 An acL whlch ls noL done wlLh Lhe lnLenLlon sLaLed ln SubsecLlon (1a) does noL make Lhe
acLor llable Lo Lhe oLher ln a mere offenslve conLacL wlLh Lhe oLher's person alLhough
Lhe acL lnvolves an unreasonable rlsk of lnfllcLlng lL and Lherefore would be negllgenL
or reckless lf Lhe rlsk LhreaLened bodlly harm
aLLern v lnsLrucLed [ury
llsher v Carrousel MoLor PoLel lnc 1967 (snaLchlng of plaLe)
lssue Can have a cause for baLLery lf he was nelLher Louched nor ln apprehenslon of physlcal
ln[ury?
Poldlng/8ule ?es Lhe basls of an acLlon for baLLery ls Lhe unpermlLLed and lnLenLlonal lnvaslon
of 's person and noL acLual harm done Lo
Summary
8aLLery lnLenLlonal Louchlng ln harmful or offenslve manner
4 lnLenLlonalvolunLary or vallsclous acL
4 urpose of conLacL
1ouchlng/conLacL
4 Cb[ecL can be used Lo do Louchlng
4 uoes have Lo person
4 A does noL have Lo be presenL (Lrap)
ConLacL v consequences
4 lnLend conLacL noL he consequences
Parmful/offenslve Louchlng
4 Cb[ecLlve LesL
8easonable person would flnd lL offenslve
Mallclous moLlve noL requlred
4 CommlL baLLery wlLhouL meanlng Lo hurL person

Class 3 8/31/11 AssaulL p 3741 lalse lmprlsonmenL p 4143

l de S eL ux W de S 1348 (grandpa of all assaulL cases drunk Lrylng Lo buy wlne)
lssue Can recover for assaulL lf Lhere was no harm?
Poldlng/8ule ?es A person can recover from an assaulL wlLhouL acLual harm buL was lnLended
Lo be harmed
AssaulL Lhe LhreaL or aLLempL Lo sLrlke anoLher wheLher or noL successful provlded Lhe LargeL
ls aware of Lhe danger
lnLenL acLlng wlLh 1) purpose 2) subsLanLlal cerLalnLy a resulL wlll occur
Why ls assaulL dlfferenL from any oLher LorL?
More menLal
revenLlng apprehenslon
keeplng Lhe peace
lour elemenLs of assaulL
1 lnLenLlonally
2 uLLlng anoLher person ln apprehenslon
3 Cf lmmlnenL bodlly conLacL
4 ApparenL ablllLy Lo make LhaL happen (dlffers from acLual ablllLy)
Cnly nomlnal damages have Lo be shown

WesLern unlon 1elegraph Co v Plll 1933 (flxlng clock")
lssue Was Lhere such an assaulL as wlll [usLlfy an acLlon for damages?
Poldlng/8ule yes AssaulL requlres unlawful aLLempL Lo commlL baLLery musL be lnLenLlonal
unlawful offer Lo Louch Lhe person of anoLher ln angry manner Lo creaLe percelved assaulL and
fear of baLLery
lear wlLh apprehenslon/ apprehenslon wlLhouL fear
SplLLlng on someone ls baLLery buL you don'L fear lL
ln general words alone are noL assaulL unless money or your llfe"
Mere preparaLlon for a baLLery ls noL assaulL (excepL ex lcklng up a rock)
lalse lmprlsonmenL
ueprlvlng someone of freedom of movemenL by holdlng person ln conflned space or by physlcal
resLralnL lncludlng belng locked ln car drlven abouL wlLhouL opporLunlLy Lo geL ouL belng Lled
up followup Lo false arresL *kldnapplng wlLh no bellef or clalm of legal rlghL Lo hold person
1 AcLs wlLh lnLenLlon Lo conflne
2 AcLs dlrecLly/lndlrecLly conflne
3 Consclous/harmed by lL
AcLual and punlLlve damages
8lg 1own -urslng Pome lnc (A) v -ewman () 1970 (uncle ln nurslng home)
lssue WheLher Lhe acLs agalnsL were consldered lalse lmprlsonmenL?
Poldlng/8ule ?es ll ls Lhe dlrecL resLralnL of one person of Lhe physlcal llberLy of anoLher
wlLhouL adequaLe legal [usLlflcaLlon
arvl v ClLy of klngsLon 1977 (drunk guy on golf course)
lssue ls lL necessary for Lo remember hls lmprlsonmenL ln order for hlm Lo have cause for ll?
Poldlng/8ule ll ls suffered only when vlcLlm ls consclous of lmprlsonmenL
Pe may noL remember now buL was consclous durlng Lhe acLlon
8esL 42 no llablllLy for lnLenLlonally conflnlng anoLher unless Lhe person physlcally resLralned
knows of Lhe conflnemenL or ls harmed by lL
ll ls noL suffered unless lLs vlcLlm knows Lhe dlgnlLy lnvaslon (dlgnlLy LorL)
ll
1) 8easonable means of escape
2) MusL know means of escape (apparenL)
3) unreasonable lf causes exposure Lo vlcLlm

Class 6 9/2/11 lalse lmprlsonmenL ConL p 4331

Pardy v La8elle's ulsLrlbuLlng Co 1983 (waLch Laken)
lssues
1 WheLher Lhe evldence ls sufflclenL Lo supporL Lhe verdlcL and [udgmenL of such resLralnL?
2 WheLher Lhe ulsLrlcL CourL erred ln lssue of lnsLrucLlons?
Poldlng/8ule -o and -o
1wo elemenLs of ll are Lhe resLralnL or an lndlvldual agalnsL her wlll and unlawfulness of
such resLralnL 1he lndlvldual may be resLralned by acLs or merely by words whlch he fears
Lo dlsregard
LnrlghL v Croves 1977 (dog leash ordlnance)
lssue wheLher Lhe arresL and lmprlsonmenL was lawful?
Poldlng/rule -o lL was ll and lalse arresL lalse arresL arlses when one ls Laken lnLo cusLody
by a person who clalms buL does noL have proper legal auLhorlLy
1orL 11 convlcLlon for crlme ls compleLe defense Lo a subsequenL clalm of lalse arresL
WhlLLaker v Sandford 1912 (culL on a yachL)
lssue WheLher resLralnL can be by way of uLlllLy or barrler?
Poldlng/rule ll musL be by way of acLual physlcal resLralnL noL mere moral lnfluence

-oLes on ll
er Lhe 8esLaLemenL of 1orLs how can acLual conflnemenL be broughL abouL?
1 by acLual or apparenL barrlers
2 by overpowerlng physlcal force or submlsslon Lo physlcal force
3 by submlsslon Lo a LhreaL Lo apply physlcal force
4 by submlsslon Lo duress oLher Lhan LhreaLs of physlcal force (LhreaL Lo Lhe physlcal safeLy of a
famlly member)
3 by Laklng a person lnLo cusLody under an asserLed legal auLhorlLy

-oLe 1 page 47
1 Submlsslon Lo mere verbal dlrecLlons of anoLher unaccompanled by force or a LhreaL of force
does noL consLlLuLe lnvolunLary conflnemenL
2 lear of loslng ones [ob does noL render Lhe behavlor lnduced lnvolunLary

Class 7 9/3/11 lnLenLlonal lnfllcLlon of LmoLlonal ulsLress p 3168

SLaLe 8ubblsh CollecLors v Slllznoff 1932 (mob LhreaL)
lssue Can someone recover damages for emoLlonal dlsLress" when Lhere ls no ln[ury?
Poldlng/8ule ?es a cause of acLlon ls esLabllshed when lL ls shown LhaL one ln Lhe absence of
any prlvllege lnLenLlonally sub[ecLs anoLher Lo Lhe menLal sufferlng lncldenL Lo serlous LhreaLs
Lo hls physlcal wellbelng wheLher or noL Lhe LhreaLs are made under such clrcumsLances as Lo
consLlLuLe a Lechnlcal assaulL"
8esLaLemenL 46 Cne who wlLhouL a prlvllege Lo do so lnLenLlonally causes severe emoLlonal
dlsLress Lo anoLher ls llable a) for such emoLlonal dlsLress and b) for bodlly harm resulLlng from
lL"
unllke Callfornla some sLaLes recognlze lnLenLlonal lnfllcLlon of MenLal ulsLress as a LorL buL
resLrlcL lLs appllcaLlon Lo slLuaLlons ln whlch Lhe has suffered physlcal consequences"
-umerous declslons ln whlch physlcal ln[ury ls noL necessary Lo recover lf A's conducL exceeds
Lhe llmlLs of soclal LoleraLlon"
2
nd
allows for cause of acLlon based on llMu saylng LhaL llablllLy exlsLs when A's conducL ls
exLreme and ouLrageous"
Cne lmporLanL parL of Lhls case ls LhaL afLer 1947 Lhe new rule ls LhaL can recover for llLu
wlLhouL showlng physlcal harm"
-ew rule requlres severe emoLlonal dlsLress"
CourL says lL musL be severe" Lo prevenL Lhe flood gaLes of llLlgaLlon"
O usL havlng emoLlonal dlsLress"
LlemenLs of llLu from Lhls case
lnLenL Lo cause severe emoLlonal dlsLress
Severe emoLlonal dlsLress musL occur
lnLenLlonal LorLs
AssaulL
8aLLery
lalse lmprlsonmenL
1respass Lo chaLLels
1respass Lo land
Why noL llLu LorL?

Slocum v lood lalr SLores of llorlda 1938(you sLlnk")
lssue under llorlda common law does have acLlon based on llMu lf Lhe emoLlonal dlsLress ls
noL severe?
Poldlng/rule -o wheLher words or conducL are acLlonable ls Lo be made on an ob[ecLlve
raLher Lhan sub[ecLlve sLandard Lhe unwarranLed lnLruslon musL be calculaLed Lo cause severe
emoLlonal dlsLress Lo a person of ordlnary senslblllLles ln Lhe absence of speclal knowledge or
noLlce"
a cerLaln Loughenlng of Lhe menLal hlde ls a beLLer proLecLlon Lhan Lhe law could ever be"
no presslng soclal need requlres LhaL every abuslve ouLbursL musL be converLed lnLo a LorL"
1hls lnLroduces Lhe reasonableness (p 37)
llLu
1 lnLenL Lo cause severe emoLlonal dlsLress
2 Severe emoLlonal dlsLress occurs
3 CausaLlon (A's acLlon had Lo cause lL)
4 ConducL musL be exLreme and ouLrageous

Parrls v ones 1977 (nervous sLuLLer)
lssue dld ones' lnsulLs abouL Parrls' speech lmpedlmenL cause severe emoLlonal dlsLress?
Poldlng/rule no
8ule 1 Lhere ls llablllLy for conducL exceedlng all bounds usually LoleraLed by decenL socleLy of
a naLure whlch ls especlally calculaLed Lo cause and does cause menLal dlsLress of a very
serlous klnd"
****8ule 2 four elemenLs necessary for llablllLy for lnLenLlonal lnfllcLlon of LmoLlonal ulsLress
1 ConducL musL be lnLenLlonal or reckless
2 ConducL musL be exLreme of ouLrageous
3 1here musL be casual connecLlon beLween Lhe wrongful conducL and Lhe emoLlonal
dlsLress
4 1he emoLlonal dlsLress musL be server
1hls case ls dlfferenL musL be serlous enough Lo deLermlne damages or llablllLy
8esL 46 commenL d llablllLy has been found only where Lhe conducL has been so ouLrageous
ln characLer and so exLreme ln degree as Lo go beyond all posslble bounds of decency and Lo
be regarded as aLroclous and uLLerly lnLolerable ln a clvlllzed communlLy"
ConfllcL wlLh Slocum (you sLlnk")
1hls case says you [usL elLher need lnLenL or Lhe conducL Lo be reckless ln Slocum
recklessness ls noL enough Lo geL llLu
1he dlfference ln Lhe cases ls Slocum used Lhe 1
sL
8esL 46 where Parrls used Lhe 2
nd
ln 2
nd

reck|essness ls sufflclenL

1aylor v vallelunga 1939 (waLched dad geL beaL up)
lssue for a cause ln llMu Lo be acLlonable musL A lnLend LhaL Lhe acLlon or lnsulL be done for
Lhe purpose of causlng emoLlonal dlsLress Lo ?
Poldlng/rule ?es
8ule 1 cause of acLlon you can recover ln slLuaLlons where no physlcal ln[ury followed Lhe
sufferlng of menLal dlsLress (lllzooff)
a cause of acLlon ls esLabllshed when lL ls shown LhaL one ln Lhe absence of any prlvllege
lnLenLlonally sub[ecLs anoLher Lo Lhe menLal sufferlng lncldenL Lo serlous LhreaLs Lo hls
physlcal well belng wheLher or noL Lhe LhreaLs are made under such clrcumsLances as Lo
consLlLuLe Lechnlcal assaulL"
8ule 2 8esL 46 an lnLenLlon Lo cause severe emoLlonal dlsLress exlsLs when Lhe acL ls done
for Lhe purpose of causlng Lhe dlsLress of wlLh knowledge on Lhe parL of Lhe acLor LhaL Lhe
severe emoLlonal dlsLress ls subsLanLlally cerLaln Lo be produced"
Why lsn'L Lhere Lransferred lnLenL" ln Lhls case?
uoes noL apply
ubllc pollcy reasons (3 mllllon see presldenL dle can Lhey all recover?)

Class 8 1respass Lo Land p 6874

uoqbetty v te 1833
8ule Lvery unauLhorlzed and unlawful enLry lnLo close of anoLher

-oLes
8esL (second) 1orLs 163 when Lhe enLry upon Lhe land ls merely negllgenL proof of some
acLual damages ls essenLlal Lo Lhe cause of acLlon
know Lhese Lerms
1 -ulsance
2 Adverse possesslon
3 CuleL LlLle
1respass reserved for an lnLenLlonal lnvaslon of LhaL lnLeresL Lhe rlghL Lo excluslve possesslon
of land
lnLenLlonal even when Lhe A enLers Lhe land ln Lhe honesL and reasonable bellef LhaL lL
ls hls own
awarded nomlnal damages lf no acLual (compensaLory) damages
common law lnLenLed Lo keep Lhe peace
1 unauLhorlzed
2 enLry lnLo
3 properLy of anoLher
When Lrespass ls found Lhe facL LhaL A's conducL was soclally useful or even beneflclal
Lo does noL affecL llablllLy
1respass ls Lo possessor's land noL necessarlly Lhe owner's
LmoLlonal dlsLress damages may be recovered even ln Lhe absence of physlcal ln[ury
e[ecLmenL
would lle lf Lhe A was ln possesslon of Lhe land raLher Lhan [usL havlng been on lL
Lemporarlly

Perrln v SuLherland 1923 (duck hunLlng)
8ule Lhe passage of forelgn ob[ecL ln alr above our soll belng Lhus a mere lncldenL and a dlsLlncL
Lrespass Lo person or properLy (Lrespass wlLhouL Louchlng soll)

-oLes
[usL have Lo loteoJ on sLep on land noL necessarlly loteoJ on harmlng lL
no damages needed for Lrespass
#ns est solm es est olpe oJ noelm et oJ lofetoswhose ls Lhe soll hls lL also unLo Lhe
sky and Lhe depLhs
Ceneral demurrer dlsmlss because no acLlon
lmmedlaLe reaches"
lllghL by alrcrafL ls never Lrespassory and 's remedy lles ln negllgence or nulsance
koqets v ootJ of kooJJ omts fot keot ooty 1947 (sLake ln ground causlng mower wreck)

160 Ia||ure to remove a th|ng p|aced on the |and pursuant to a ||cense or other pr|v||ege
a Lrespass acLlonable under Lhe rule sLaLed ln 138 may be commlLLed by Lhe conLlnued presence on
Lhe land of a sLrucLure chaLLel or oLher Lhlng whlch Lhe acLor or hls predecessor ln legal lnLeresL Lhereln
has placed Lhereon
a) WlLh Lhe consenL of Lhe person Lhen ln possesslon of Lhe land ls Lhe acLor falls Lo remove lL
afLer Lhe consenL has been effecLlvely LermlnaLed or
b) ursuanL Lo a prlvllege conferred on Lhe acLor lrrespecLlve of Lhe possessor's consenL lf Lhe
acLor falls Lo remove lL afLer Lhe prlvllege has been LermlnaLed by Lhe accompllshmenL oL lLs
purpose or oLherwlse
-oLes
A prlvlleged enLry onLo Lhe land of anoLher may be llmlLed by Llme space and by purpose
lmporLance of Lhls case expandlng LorLs Lo lnclude conLlnulng Lrespass (person may lnlLlally
have consenL buL Lurn lnLo Lrespass)
Space Llme and purpose llmlLaLlons
AL common law Lrespass would noL lle unless A enLered Lhe land lllegally As Lhe case ls no
longer conLrolllng and a Lrespass can arlse Loday when a vlslLor who enLered wlLh consenL of
Lhe possessor oversLays" hls welcome however vlslLor musL be aware he no longer has Lhe
consenL Lo remaln
A prlvaLe may conLrol an area so exLenslve LhaL lL becomes publlc" for Lhe purposes of llrsL
AmendmenL freedom of speech provlslons

C|ass 9 9]9]11 1respass to Chatte|s p 7481

1respass Lo chaLLel
1 lnLenLlonal
2 lnLerference/dlspossesslon
3 WlLh chaLLel
4 Cf anoLher
3 1haL resulLs ln damage/ln[ury
mlsLake" ls -C1 a defense
llJJeo v zyblok 1949 (4 yr old pulllng dog's ears)
8ule
1 chlld can be aL such Lender years Lo be lncapable of nelLher Lrespass nor negllgence
2 LlablllLy of owner any person Lo whom or Lo whose properLy damage may be occasloned by a
dog noL owned or kepL by hlm shall be enLlLled Lo recover such damage of Lhe person who owns
or keeps Lhe dog or has lL ln possesslon unless Lhe damage was occasloned Lo hlm whlle he was
engaged ln Lhe commlsslon of a Lrespass or oLher LorL
218 one who wlLhouL consensual or oLher prlvllege Lo do so uses or oLherwlse lnLenLlonally
lnLermeddles wlLh a chaLLel whlch ls ln possesslon of anoLher ls llable for a Lrespass Lo such person lf
a) Lhe chaLLel ls lmpalred as Lo lLs condlLlon quallLy or value or b) Lhe possessor ls deprlved of Lhe
use of Lhe chaLLel for a subsLanLlal Llme or c) bodlly harm ls Lhereby caused Lo Lhe possessor or
harm ls caused Lo some person or Lhlng ln whlch Lhe possessor has a legally proLecLed lnLeresL

-oLes
ChaLLels lnvolve
1respass de bonls asporLaLls asporLaLlon or carrylng off
Cases where chaLLels are damaged buL noL Laken as where anlmals were beaLen or
kllled
ometve lon v ybet ltomotloos lon 1997
lssue WheLher ln[uncLlve rellef can lssue for Lrespass upon personal properLy lnvolvlng Lhe lnLerneL?
8ule Cne who commlLs a Lrespass Lo chaLLels ls sub[ecL Lo llablllLy Lo Lhe possessor of Lhe chaLLel lf buL
only lf a) he dlspossesses Lhe oLher of Lhe chaLLel or b) Lhe chaLLel ls lmpalred as Lo lLs condlLlon
quallLy or value or c) Lhe possessor ls deprlved of Lhe use of Lhe chaLLel for a subsLanLlal Llme or d)
bodlly harm ls caused Lo Lhe possessor or harm ls caused Lo some person or Lhlng ln whlch Lhe
possessor has a legally proLecLed lnLeresL 8esL 218

C|ass 10 Convers|on p 8191

Nature of the 1ort (Convers|on)
leotsoo v uoJJ 1969 (senaLor)
lssue wheLher Lhe lnformaLlon Laken by means of copylng a person's offlce flles ls of Lhe Lype whlch Lhe
law of converslon proLecLs?
Poldlng/8ule -o an lnLenLlonal exerclse of domlnlon or conLrol over a chaLLel whlch so serlously
lnLerferes wlLh Lhe rlghL of anoLher Lo conLrol lL LhaL Lhe acLor may [usLly be requlred Lo pay Lhe oLher
Lhe full value of Lhe chaLLel (lnformaLlon noL dlmlnlshed of value nor deprlved of use)

-oLes
1wo causes of acLlon
1 lnvaslon of prlvacy
2 Converslon
lnLermeddllng noL sufflclenL for converslon
8allee glven possesslon of anoLher's properLy for speclflc purpose
SLorage
Safekeeplng
1ransporLaLlon
ServanL possesslon for llmlLed purpose
rofessor/unlverslLy servanL/masLer relaLlonshlp
lraud LlLle passes orlglnal owner can resclnd Lhe sale
SLolen converslon
MosL sLaLes requlre reLurn of purchase lf demended
1rover when someone losL properLy someone else found lL and converLed lL Lo be Lhelr own
Converslon
1 lnLenLlonal
2 Lxerclse of domlnlon or conLrol
3 Cver a chaLLel
4 Cf anoLher
3 Whlch serlously lnLerferes wlLh Lhe possessor's rlghL of conLrol
We look aL who ls ln possesslon noL necessarlly who has ownershlp
ln Lrespass chaLLel musL be reLurned
Converslon does noL have Lo Lake chaLLel back buL can recelve falr markeL value
1wo causes of acLlon ln leotsoo
1 lnvaslon of prlvacy
2 Converslon
lnLermeddllng noL sufflclenL for converslon
222A What Const|tutes Convers|on
(1) Converslon ls an lnLenLlonal exerclse of domlnlon or conLrol over a chaLLel whlch so
serlously lnLerferes wlLh Lhe rlghL of anoLher Lo conLrol lL LhaL Lhe acLor may [usLly be
requlred Lo pay Lhe oLher Lhe full value of Lhe chaLLel
(2) ln deLermlnlng Lhe serlousness of Lhe lnLerference and Lhe [usLlce of requlrlng Lhe acLor Lo
pay Lhe full value Lhe followlng facLors are lmporLanL
(a) 1he exLenL and duraLlon of Lhe acLor's exerclse of domlnlon or conLrol
(b) 1he acLor's lnLenL Lo asserL a rlghL ln facL lnconslsLenL wlLh Lhe oLher's rlghL of conLrol
(c) 1he acLor's good falLh
(d) 1he exLenL and duraLlon of Lhe resulLlng lnLerference wlLh Lhe oLher's rlghL of conLrol
(e) 1he harm done Lo Lhe chaLLel
(f) 1he lnconvenlences and expense cause Lo Lhe oLher
Ways ln whlch an acLor may converL a chaLLel lnLenLlonally exerclse and conLrol over lL LhaL so
serlously lnLerferes wlLh Lhe owner's rlghL Lo conLrol lL LhaL lL ls [usL Lo requlre Lhe acLor Lo pay
lLs full value lnclude Lhe followlng
1 Acqulrlng possesslon of lL (ex sLeallng Lhe chaLLel)
2 uamaglng or alLerlng lL (ex lnLenLlonally runnlng over an anlmal and kllllng lL)
3 uslng lL (ex A ballee serlously vlolaLes Lhe Lerms of Lhe ballmenL)
4 8ecelvlng lL (ex CbLalnlng possesslon afLer a purchase from a Lhlef)
3 ulsposlng of lL (a ballee wrongfully sells Lhe chaLLel)
6 Mlsdellverlng lL (ex dellvery Lo wrong person by mlsLake so LhaL Lhe chaLLel ls losL)
7 8efuslng Lo surrender lL (ex 8allee refuses Lo reLurn Lhe chaLLel)
A LffecL of Cood lalLh
When Lhe A lnLends Lo affecL Lhe chaLLel ln a manner lnconslsLenL wlLh Lhe 's rlghL of conLrol
Lhe facL LhaL he acLed ln good falLh and under a mlsLake does noL prevenL llablllLy for converslon
8allee glven possesslon of anoLher's properLy for speclflc purpose (sLorage safe
keeplng or LransporLaLlon)
ServanL possesslon for a llmlLed purpose (professor ls servanL and LlberLy ls MasLer ln a
relaLlonshlp)
8 -ecesslLy of uemand 8eLurn of ChaLLel
uemand possessor ls llable only lf refuslng Lo reLurn Lhe goods on demand converslon occurs
as soon as Lhe A Lakes domlnlon and conLrol over Lhe goods ln a manner lnconslsLenL wlLh 's
ownershlp
1orLs 229 Lhere may be a separaLe acL of converslon for an lnlLlal Laklng of possesslon
and for a laLer refusal Lo reLurn on demand and Lhe owner can elecL beLween Lhem
8eLurn when converLer offers Lo reLurn Lhe converLed goods and Lhe owner accepLs Lhe reLurn
does noL excuse from converslon buL wlll be Laken lnLo accounL Lhe A could noL force Lhe goods
back upon possessor ln reducLlon of Lhe damages
C uamages
1he measure of damages for converslon ls Lhe value of Lhe properLy converLed
usually markeL value whaL Lhe properLy could have been sold for ln Lhe markeL by a
wllllng seller Lo a wllllng buyer deLermlned aL Lhe Llme and place of Lhe converslon
oLher meLhods (lf can'L deLermlne markeL value) can be used such as manufacLurlng
cosLs less depreclaLlon
punlLlve damages may be allowed when Lhe converslon was mallclous buL noL when lL
was done lnnocenLly
u WhaL may be converLed
An acLlon agalnsL Lhe funder of losL goods Lrover was llmlLed Lo Lhe converslon of Lhlngs LhaL
were capable of belng losL and found
Any chaLLel buL noL for land whlch ln Lhe eyes of Lhe law could noL be losL
-CW added severance so goods became chaLLels
L Who may malnLaln Lhe acLlon?
1rover llke Lrespass was founded upon Lhe 's possesslon
Anyone ln possesslon of a chaLLel aL Lhe Llme of a converslon can malnLaln an acLlon for lL Lhus
a flnder can recover for converslons
Cne converLer may recover from anoLher
LxLended Lo permlL recovery by one who dld noL have possesslon buL had Lhe lmmedlaLe rlghL
Lo lL

C|ass 11 r|v||eges Consent

tleo v ootJ o 1891(shoL now or quaranLlne)
lssue wheLher A lacked consenL when dld noL volce her ob[ecLlon or acLed ln such LhaL showed she
dld noL consenL?
8ule lf 's behavlor ls such as Lo lndlcaLe consenL on person A ls [usLlfled ln hls acL whaLever her
unexpressed feellngs may have been

-oLes 9/14
WhaL consLlLuLes converslon?
lmplled v express
1 acLlon/lnacLlon
2 prlor deallngs
3 clrcumsLances
-CW WL CL1 l-1C LlA8lLl1?!! (b/c we geL lnLo prlvllege)
4 lnLenLlonal 1orLs h
4 lnLenLlonal" defendanL has lnLenLlonally produced a seL of speclflcally ldenLlfled
consequences deflned by Lhe 1orL"
?ou are noL asklng wheLher Lhey have acLed wrongfully
lnLenL deals wlLh Lhe defendanLs mlnd
All oLher elemenLs uC -C1 have anyLhlng Lo do wlLh whaL's ln Lhe
defendanL's mlnd
ConsenL ls dlfferenL Lhan all oLher prlvlleges
4 8urden of showlng LhaL consenL exlsLs resLs on Lhe plalnLlff lgnore Lhls for now and
leL's flgure ouL why
C'8rlen case
4 1here was baLLery
Pe had lnLenL Lo commlL a P or C conLacL (sLlcklng a needle lnLo someone's
skln ls harmful)
1he conLacL occurred
4 1hen why dld Lhe courL Lhrow Lhe case ouL?
1hey sald Lhere was ConsenL" Lo Lhe conLacL on Lhe parL of
uo you need AcLual ConsenL"
ls lL whaL a reasonable person would conslder Lo be consenL?
uoes consenL requlre any words
O -o lL can be manlfesLed Lhrough acLlons
4 ConsenL
Words
AcLlons
4 PypoLheLlcal uocLor comes upon seen of a Lrafflc accldenL Pe asks lf she wanLs
LreaLmenL She doesn'L speak Lngllsh She shakes her head '-o' because she does
noL know whaL he ls saylng uocLor helps her anyway and ln facL she wanLed Lhe
help She laLer sues ls Lhere baLLery?
Pe lnLends harmful conLacL
Parmful conLacL occurs
ConsenL was noL consenL Lo a reasonable person 1herefore docLor does
noL have prlvllege of consenL uoes Lhls boLher you?
Why should consenL serve as a defense Lo baLLery?
O lf Lhe Louchlng could be beneflclal?
AcLual ConsenL"
SomeLlmes people won'L have acLual consenL" buL wlll acL ln a way where
a
WhaL ls ConsenL?
O AcLual consenL or word or deed LhaL would suggesL consenL Lo a
reasonable person
O 1hls flxes boLh Lhe hypoLheLlcal and C'8rlen
Why should Lhe defense of consenL be consLrued Lhls broadly?
O llood gaLes of llLlgaLlon
O lace Loo hlgh a burden on people lnLeracLlng wlLh 1he only way
Lo know wheLher or noL Lo proceed ls lf you could read Lhelr mlnd
lalrness Lo Lhe defendanL
4 PypoLheLlcal u ls on a publlc sLreeL geLs lnLo an argumenL wlLh Pe says lf you
don'L leave now l'll punch you ln Lhe face sLands hls ground u punches hlm ln
Lhe face uoes he have Lhe defense of consenL?
AcLual consenL
ManlfesLaLlon of consenL Lo a reasonable person
4 PypoLheLlcal u says lf you don'L leave my house rlghL now l'll Lhrow you ouL u
Lhrows ouL of Lhe house uoes he have Lhe prlvllege of ConsenL?
-C!!
O Pe may have some oLher prlvllege buL he doesn'L have acLual
consenL and he does noL have manlfesLaLlon of consenL


onkott v lonloootl eoqols lon 1979 (fooLball ln[ury)
lssue Can an ln[ury lnfllcLed by a professlonal fooLball player ln a regular season game glve rlse Lo
llablllLy ln LorL when lL arlses from an lnLenLlonal sLrlke?
8ule All players are prohlblLed from sLrlklng on Lhe head face or neck wlLh Lhe heel back or slde of Lhe
hand wrlsL forearm elbow or collapsed hands

-oLes
1o esLabllsh reasonable boundarles
8emedy ls reLallaLlon

,obt v wlllloms 1908 (operaLed on lefL ear consenLed Lo rlghL)
lssue ls express consenL necessary for a docLor Lo be relleved from llablllLy for assaulL and baLLery lf he
ls performlng an operaLlon wlLh Lhe lnLenLlon of helplng Lhe paLlenL?
8ule
1 1he courL says LhaL lf paLlenL consenLs Lo an operaLlon and durlng lL Lhe physlclan dlscovers
condlLlons LhaL were noL anLlclpaLed LhaL would endanger the ||fe or hea|th of Lhe paLlenL he
would be [usLlfled ln exLendlng Lhe operaLlon wlLhouL express consenL
2 Crlmlnal A8 vs Clvll A8 1hls case ls unllke ln a cr|m|na| prosecut|on for A8 for Lhere an
un|awfu| |ntent must be shown 8uL that ru|e does not app|y to a c|v|| act|on Lo malnLaln
whlch lL ls sufflclenL Lo show LhaL Lhe A complalned of was wrongful and unlawful or Lhe resulL
of negllgence"
-oLes 9/14
Wasn'L llfe LhreaLenlng
-ew Lrlal on damages only
8lfurcaLed lssue case on llablllLy only (don'L geL Lo damages unLll we esLabllsh llablllLy)

,ed|ca| Care Consent
,ed|ca| care prov|ders can acL ln absence of express consenL lf (p94 3)
4 1 paLlenL ls unable Lo glve consenL (eg unconsclous lnLoxlcaLed menLally lll)
4 2 Lhere ls rlsk of serlous bodlly harm lf LreaLmenL ls delayed
4 3 a reasonable person would consenL Lo LreaLmenL under Lhe clrcumsLances
4 4 Lhls paLlenL would consenL Lo LreaLmenL under Lhe clrcumsLances
W|thdrawa| of consent
4 WlLhdrawal of consenL means physlclan musL geL new consenL
Ch||d |s a m|nor?
4 ConsenL of parenL ls necessary for any ma[or surglcal operaLlon excepL an
emergency
Can parenLs consenL" on behalf of a mlnor Lo be a donor ln a LransplanL
operaLlon for Lhe beneflL of a slbllng?
Mohr case
4 1here ls baLLery
lnLenL for Parmful conLacL
Parmful conLacL occurs
4 Pe ls clalmlng LhaL he ls noL llable because he has Lhe case of consenL
Consent ,D1 come from the |nd|v|dua|
Asdfd
PypoLheLlcal aLlenL comes lnLo hosplLal unconsclous ln her walleL ls a card LhaL says she
doesn'L wanL blood Lransfuslons and she needs one Can Lhe docLor proceed?
4 -o
PypoLheLlcal Wlfe ls hurL Pusband does noL consenL Lo operaLlon Can docLor proceed?
4 ?es Pusband ls a Lhlrd parLy and cannoL Lake away consenL of paLlenL
LxcepLlon lf he ls a durable power of aLLorney
uefense of ConsenL
4 AcLual ConsenL
4 ManlfesLaLlon of consenL
4 unconsclous and faced wlLh llfeLhreaLenlng condlLlon + no manlfesLaLlon of lack of
consenL
lalnLlff has Lo esLabllsh Lhere was consenL
4 CLher defenses Lhere wlll be wrongful behavlor

ue ,oy v kobetts 1881 (nondocLor helplng ln blrLh)
lssue lf you llllclL consenL from someone by decelvlng Lhem does Lhe consenL remove Lhe llablllLy for
Lhe acLlons Lhen Laken?
8ule lf you llllclL consenL from someone by decelvlng Lhem Lhe consenL does noL remove llablllLy for
acLlons Laken based on LhaL folse consenL

-oLes 9/16
8lghL Lo prlvacy
lnLroduces fraud
1o negaLe consenL
1he frauds musL perLaln Lo cenLral characLer of Lhe acL noL collaLeral maLLer
ConsenL Lo lllegal acL
Lx SLaLuLory rape (mlnor consenL ls lnvalld)
A slLuaLlon where someone commlLs an lllegal acL buL someone consenLed Lo LhaL
acL
ConsenL lnduced by fraud"
lnLoxlcaLlon
4 ConsenL ls lneffecLlve lf ls lncapable of expresslng raLlonal wlll
nformed Consent
4 uocLrlne of lnformed consenL" requlres LhaL a physlclan dlsclose Lo Lhe paLlenL Lhe
rlsks of Lhe proposed medlcal LreaLmenL lf she does noL do so she may be llable
when ln[ury resulLs from Lhe LreaLmenL
8efore 1960 llablllLy was placed on Lhe ground of battery
|nce around 1960 fallure Lo dlsclose Lhe rlsk has been LreaLed as a breach
of Lhe docLor's professlonal duLy" and ls Lherefore placed on grounds of
neg||gence

C|ass 12 p 104120

e|f Defense (notes page 104107)
lmporLanL because self preservaLlon ls flrsL law of naLure
May use self defense Lo sLop an lmpendlng baLLer
CannoL use for prlor baLLery (reLallaLlon)
Can'L use for mere words (unless accompanled by some acLlon)
AfflrmaLlve defense
1 necesslLy force noL be used unless or Lo sLop Lhe exLenL necessary
2 Can only use force ls necessary or reasonably appears Lo be necessary for proLecLlon
agalnsL Lhe LhreaLened baLLery
3 have Lo have reasonable grounds Lo belleve force ls needed Lo proLecL self' and person
musL acLually belleve
Lven lf Lhe person lnlLlally was an aggressor once he has reLreaLed he has a rlghL Lo self
defense agalnsL Lhe person he lnlLlally LhreaLened
8eLreaL
ueadly force
CasLle docLrlne lf ln house don'L have Lo reLreaL
SLand your ground" rule
Defense of Cthers p 10709
2 quesLlons for self defense
1 was Lhlrd person enLlLled Lo use self defense?
2 dld A use reasonable force under clrcumsLances?
1wo approaches for reasonableness
1 shoesLepplng approach lnLervenor sLeps lnLo Lhe shoes of Lhe person he ls defendlng
and ls prlvlleged only when LhaL person would be prlvlleged Lo defend hlmself
2 mlsLaken defense of oLhers approach A ls prlvlleged Lo use reasonable force Lo defend
anoLher even when he ls mlsLaken ln hls bellef LhaL lnLervenLlon ls necessary so long as hls
mlsLake was reasonable

Defense of roperty p 109
kotko v tloey 1971 (sprlng gun)
lssue wheLher an owner may proLecL personal properLy ln an occupled boarded up farm house agalnsL
Lrespassers and Lhleves uslng a sprlng gun capable of lnfllcLlng deaLh or serlous ln[ury?
8ule Lhe value of human llfe and llmb noL only Lo Lhe lndlvldual concerned buL also Lo socleLy so
ouLwelghs Lhe lnLeresL of a possessor of land ln excludlng from lL Lhose whom he ls noL wllllng Lo admlL
LhereLo LhaL a possessor of land has as ls sLaLed ln 79 no prlvllege Lo use force lnLended or llkely Lo
cause deaLh or serlous harm agalnsL anoLher whom Lhe possessor sees abouL Lo enLer hls premlses or
meddle wlLh hls chaLLel unless Lhe lnLruslon LhreaLens deaLh or serlous bodlly harm Lo Lhe occuplers or
users of Lhe premlses
1he prlvllege Lo defend ones land agalnsL an lnLruder ls llmlLed Lo unlawful lnLruslons
1hus Lhere ls no prlvllege Lo use force Lo defend agalnsL Lhose who are auLhorlzed Lo
enLer
LlmlLed Lo Lhe use reasonably necessary Lo slLuaLlon as lL appears Lo Lhe A
When Lhe lnvaslon ls peaceful and occurs ln Lhe presence of Lhe possessor Lhe use of
any force aL all wlll be unreasonable unless a requesL has been made Lo deparL
A requesL does noL have Lo be made however when Lhe conducL of Lhe lnLruder would
lndlcaLe Lo a reasonable person LhaL lL would be useless or LhaL lL could noL safely be
made ln Llme
When Lhe lnvader LhreaLens Lhe personal safeLy of Lhe A or hls famlly Lhe A may use
deadly force lf lL ls necessary ln Lhe clrcumsLances (when lnvader enLers home aL nlghL)
A prlvllege Lo use reasonable force Lo prevenL Lhe commlsslon of a crlme
1he llmlLaLlons on Lhe possessor's prlvllege may also resLrlcL hls power Lo e[ecL Lhe
from hls properLy lnLo a poslLlon of unreasonable physlcal danger

ecovery of roperty p 114120
oJqeJoo v bbotJ 1846 (sLeallng sLove)
lssue were As [usLlfled ln uslng force Lo reLrleve sLolen properLy?
8ule yes A have rlghL Lo reLake properLy fraudulenLly obLalned from Lhem ls done so wlLhouL
unnecessary vlolence Lo or breach of peace
ursulL musL be fresh
a dlscovery of Lhe wrong dlsposlLlon musL be prompL
b efforLs Lo recover musL be prompL and perslsLenL
8esL -oLes owner musL flrsL demand Lhe reLurn of properLy before uslng force
8epossesslon ls legal so long as lL does noL breach Lhe peace (ex Car repos usually done
aL nlghL)
uCC 9303 unless oLherwlse agreed a secured parLy has on Lhe defaulL Lhe rlghL Lo
Lake possesslon of Lhe collaLeral ln Laklng possesslon a secured parLy may proceed
wlLhouL [udlclal process lf Lhls can be done wlLhouL beach of Lhe peace"
ookowskl v Atloos uet tote 1968 (false arresL [ewelry)
lssue wheLher pollce offlcer reasonably deLalned when suspecLed of LhefL? wheLher lnvesLlgaLlon
was reasonable?
8ule a prlvllege ln favor of merchanL Lo deLaln for teosoooble lovestlqotloo a person whom he
teosooobly belleves Lo have Laken a chaLLel unlawfully
LlemenLs
8easonably belleve person Look someLhlng
8easonable lnvesLlgaLlon
lnslde/ouLslde
WhaL Lhey dld
Pow long Lhe lnvesLlgaLlon lasLed
C|ass 13 Neg||gence author|ty of |aw d|sc|p||ne and [ust|f|cat|on p 120132

Necess|ty
tonno v eoty 1833 (conflagraLlon)
lssue wheLher Lhe person who Lears down a house of anoLher ln good falLh and under apparenL
oenesslty durlng Lhe Llme of conflagraLlon for Lhe purpose of savlng Lhe bulldlng ad[acenL and sLopplng
progress can be held personally llable?
8ule 1he common law adopLs Lhe prlnclples of Lhe naLural law and places Lhe [usLlflcaLlon of an acL
oLherwlse LorLlous preclsely on Lhe same ground of necesslLy
Cne ls prlvlleged lf Lhey found LhaL Lhere was lmmlnenL danger and a real publlc
necesslLy
ConsLlLuLlonal provlslons agalnsL Laklng prlvaLe properLy for publlc use wlLhouL due
compensaLlon do noL apply Lo acLlon under Lhe pollce power Lo proLecL Lhe publlc
agalnsL Lhe spread of conLaglous dlsease or devasLaLlng flres and floods or oLher
exlgencles
-ecesslLas lnduclL prlvlleglum quod [ura prlvaLe necesslLy provldes a prlvllege for
prlvaLe rlghLs
Looks aL whaL was reasonable ln Lhe eyes of Lhe A
ubllc necesslLy
ClLlzens confer power Lo publlc offlclals Lo acL ln publlc lnLeresL
lL would lreeze a qulck and ready response lf person had Lo worry abouL llablllLy
when acLlng ln publlc lnLeresL
lor a prlvaLe clLlzen Lo acL ln publlc lnLeresL
Appearance of lmmlnenL danger
8eal publlc necesslLy
Iloneot v loke tle @toos o 1910 (shlp damaged dock)
lssue uoes Lhe facL LhaL Lhe A used ordlnary prudence and care and acLed ln necesslLy exclude hlm from
llablllLy of damages?
8ule ubllc necesslLy ln Llmes of war or peace may requlre Lhe Laklng of prlvaLe properLy for publlc
purposes buL [urlsprudence compensaLlon musL be made
1hls was a publlc necesslLy noL prlvaLe
uldn'L acL unreasonably buL has Lo pay damages however noL llable for negllgence
As obllgaLlon Lo compensaLe even Lhough Lhe lnLenLlonal enLry onLo lane was
prlvlleged and Lhus noL LorLlous
8ecap requlres LhreaL of serlous lmmlnenL harm
Model enal Code permlLs duress as a defense lf Lhe force or LhreaL of forces was such
LhaL a person of reasonably flrmness ln hls slLuaLlon would be unable Lo reslsL"
Author|ty of Law
Cfflclals (ex ollce offlcers) may acL under auLhorlLy of law engaglng ln conducL LhaL
oLherwlse would be LorLlous lf Lhe A ls duly commanded or auLhorlzed by law Lo do
whaL he does he ls noL llable
Cuallfled lmmunlLy
ArresL conslsLs of Laklng hlm lnLo Lhe cusLody of Lhe law may be made under a warranL
whlch ls a slgned order lssued by a courL dlrecLlng LhaL Lhe person ln quesLlon be
arresLed or could be made wlLhouL a warranL
ArresL under a warranL or Lhe selzure of goods under clvll process ls an acL generally
consldered Lo be mlnlsLerlal" so LhaL Lhe offlcer ls llable only lf he acLs lmproperly as
for example uslng excesslve force
AdmlralLy [urlsdlcLlon ls excluslve Lo federal courL
falr ln lLs face"
Lven lf warranL ls enLlrely valld lL does noL proLecL Lhe offlcer unless he acLually carrles
ouL Lhe order glven hlm even Lhough he makes a perfecLly reasonable mlsLake ln good
falLh
ArresL wlLhouL warranL may be made by a pollce offlcer or a publlc clLlzen
Crlglnal common law rules
1 1o prevenL a felony or breach of Lhe peace belng commlLLed or reasonably
appears so
2 lf he has lnformaLlon LhaL affords reasonable grounds
3 lor pasL breach of Lhe peace lf ln hls presence and ln fresh pursulL
4 lor a Mlsdemeanor only lf lL was ln hls presence
3 Sub[ecL Lo llablllLy lf used excesslve force
D|sc|p||ne
Lxerclse reasonable force and resLralnL upon chlld
Several facLors Lo deLermlne wlLhln scope of dlsclpllne
1 Age sex and condlLlon of chlld
2 -aLure of offense and apparenL moLlve
3 lnfluence of chlld's conducL as example on oLher chlldren ln same famlly
4 WheLher force or conflnemenL ls reasonably necessary and approprlaLe Lo
compleLe obedlence
3 WheLher lL ls dlsproporLlonaLe Lo Lhe offense unnecessarlly degradlng or llkely
Lo cause serlous or permanenL harm
ulsclpllne also covers Lhose who are Lemporarlly responslble for Lhem
AmounL of force LhaL ls accepLable may be less Lhan whaL would be accepLable for a
parenL Lo use
ulsclpllne may be exerclsed even Lhough Lhe parenLs ob[ecL
1o deLermlne excesslve force for lnsLrucLors
1 1he naLure of Lhe punlshmenL
2 1he conducL of Lhe sLudenL
3 1he age and physlcal condlLlon of Lhe sLudenL
4 1he moLlve of Lhe lnsLrucLor
Speclflc sLaLe sLaLuLes or school board regulaLlons raLher Lhan Lhe common law
Corporal punlshmenL has been held noL Lo vlolaLe Lhe due process clause of Lhe LlghLh
AmendmenL
ust|f|cat|on
loJle v New otk lty @tooslt Atbotlty 1973
lssue wheLher Lhe acLlons of Lhe bus drlver consLlLuLed [usLlflcaLlon ln false lmprlsonlng Lhe sLudenLs?
8ule 1 8esLralnL or deLenLlon reasonable under Lhe clrcumsLances and ln Llme and manner lmposed
for Lhe purpose of prevenLlng anoLher from lnfllcLlng personal ln[urles or lnLerferlng wlLh or damaglng
real or personal properLy ln one's lawful possesslon or cusLody ls noL unlawful
8ule 2 a parenL guardlan or Leacher enLrusLed wlLh Lhe care or supervlslon of a chlld may use physlcal
force reasonably necessary Lo malnLaln dlsclpllne or promoLe Lhe welfare of Lhe chlld
1he duLy Lo Lake reasonable measured for Lhe safeLy and proLecLlon of boLh Lhe
passengers and Lhe properLy
-oLes
Colluslon ls used ln Lhe lnsLance of lnsurance
usLlflcaLlon generlc Lerm
uefense Lo lnLenLlonal LorL under clrcumsLances where unfalr Lo make A llable
rlvllege
Clves Lo Lhose ln cerLaln relaLlonshlp ln whlch Lhe necesslLy of some orderly
dlsclpllne over Lhe oLher
Clves person Lhe rlghL Lo exerclse reasonable force and resLralnL (parenL/chlld)
Class 14 -egllgence p 133141
-egllgence unLll early 19
Lh
cenLury 1he breach of any legal obllgaLlon or Lo deslgnaLe a
menLal elemenL usually one of lnadverLence or lnaLLenLlon or lndlfference enLerlng lnLo Lhe
commlsslon of oLher LorLs merely one way of commlLLlng any LorL
Slnce negllgence Look separaLe form as basls for unlnLended LorLs
LlemenLs of -egllgence (conducL of Lhe person belng evaluaLed)
A duty Lo use reasonable care requlrlng Lhe acLor Lo conform Lo a cerLaln sLandard of
conducL for Lhe proLecLlon of oLhers agalnsL unreasonable rlsks
8reach of Lhe duLy A fallure Lo conform Lo Lhe requlred sLandard negllgenL behavlor
Causat|on a reasonably close casual connecLlon beLween Lhe conducL and Lhe resulLlng
ln[ury lnvolves Lhe comblnaLlon of Lwo elemenLs causaLlon ln facL and legal or
proxlmaLe" causaLlon
AcLual loss of damage resulLlng Lo Lhe lnLeresLs of anoLher nomlnal damages noL
recovered ln negllgence acLlon lf no acLual damage had occurred
lf A's rlskcreaLlng negllgenL conducL LhreaLens buL does noL harm ha may be able
Lo obLaln ln[uncLlon and sLop Lhe acLlvlLy as a nulsance"
AnoLher commonly used rubrlc for negllgence ls conducL LhaL falls below Lhe
sLandard of care esLabllshed by law for Lhe proLecLlon of oLhers agalnsL Lhe
unreasonable rlsk of harm
's conducL LhaL ls belng measured agalnsL Lhe sLandard of Lhe reasonable person
A Neg||gence Iormu|a
lbltz v wells 1933 (lefL golf club ln yard)
lssue ls A negllgenL for leavlng nondangerous ob[ecL ln yard where chlldren play?
8ule Pave Lo ob[ecL ls so obvlously and lnLrlnslcally dangerous Lo cause negllgence Lo leave ln yard

-oLes
-egllgence developed ouL of Lrespass on Lhe case
-egllgence conducL falls below Lhe sLandard of care as esLabllshed by law for Lhe
proLecLlon of oLhers agalnsL unreasonable rlsk of harm
Case ob[ecL no lnLrlnslcally dangerous
lytb v ltmlqbom wotetwotks o 1836 (flre plugs)
8ule -egllgence ls Lhe omlsslon Lo do someLhlng whlch a teosoooble moo gulded upon Lhose
conslderaLlons whlch ordlnarlly regulaLe Lhe conducL of human affalrs would do or dolng someLhlng
whlch a prudenL and reasonable man would noL do
llbet v lotsell 2007 ([erklng sLeerlng wheel)
8ule A drlver owes a duLy of care Lo her passengers because lL ls foreseeable LhaL Lhey may be ln[ured
ls Lhrough lnaLLenLlon or oLherwlse Lhe drlver lnvolves Lhe car she ls operaLlng ln a colllslon
uuLy Lo exerclse reasonable care Lo proLecL hls passengers from LhaL harm
LlemenLs
A owed duLy of care
A breached LhaL duLy
A's breach was Lhe proxlmaLe cause of Lhe 's ln[ury
Mlnors held Lo Lhe same sLandard of care
loreseeablllLy ls a [ury quesLlon
-oLes
uanger conslsLs ln Lhe rlsk of harm as well as Lhe llkellhood of lL and a danger calllng for
anLlclpaLlon need noL be of more probable occurrence Lhan led lf Lhere ls some probablllLy
of harm sufflclenLly serlous LhaL ordlnary men would Lake precauLlons Lo avold lL LhaL
fallure Lo do so ls negllgence
1he LesL ls noL Lhe balance of probablllLles buL of Lhe exlsLence of some probablllLy of
sufflclenL momenL Lo lnduce acLlon Lo avold lL on Lhe parL of a reasonable mlnd

Class 13 -egllgence ConL p 141130 1he SLandard of Care and 1he 8easonable erson p 130139
blnoqo Ok o v ktoyeobbl 1902 (LurnLable)
lssue WheLher A ls llable for falllng Lo use reasonable care Lo make premlse safe?
8ule yes ubllc good demands reasonable mosL effecLlve and unresLrlcLed use up Lo a polnL where
danger ouLwelghs beneflLs
LlemenLs ln deLermlnlng ln duLy Lo care
CharacLer and locaLlon
urpose used
robablllLy of ln[ury
recauLlons necessary Lo prevenL ln[urles
8elaLlons precauLlons bear Lo beneflclal use
uovlsoo v oobomlsb ooty 1928 (malnLaln counLry brldge)
lssue Are As llable for negllgence for noL malnLalnlng brldge on counLry road?
8ule -o lf As were requlred Lo counLry roads/brldges lL would prohlblL Lhe bulldlng of new roads and
Lend Lo Lhe flnanclal ruln of Lhe counLrles underLaklng Lo malnLaln Lhe old ones
under Lhe clrcumsLances
1 musL look aL Lhe cosL and beneflL
2 reasonable bullder
DolteJ totes v ottoll @owloq o 1947 (barge Aooo )
lssue ls Conner's llable for negllgence for noL havlng man on board durlng Lhe Llme of drlfL?
8ule ?es 1he degree of care demanded of a person be an occaslon ls Lhe resulLanL of Lhree facLors
Llkellhood conducL wlll ln[ure oLhers
1aken wlLh serlousness of ln[ury lf happens
And balanced agalnsL Lhe lnLeresL whlch he musL sacrlflce Lo avold Lhe rlsk
As a general proposlLlon Lhe greaLer Lhe rlsk of harm Lo oLhers LhaL ls creaLed by a person's
chosen acLlvlLy Lhe greaLer Lhe burden or duLy Lo avold ln[ury Lo oLhers becomes Lhus rlsk
grows greaLer and so does Lhe duLy because Lhe rlsk Lo be percelved deflnes Lhe duLy LhaL
musL be underLaken
est (econd) of 1orts
291 Dnreasonab|eness now Determ|ned ,agn|tude of and Dt|||ty of Conduct

Where an acL ls one whlch a reasonable man would recognlze as lnvolvlng a rlsk of harm Lo anoLher Lhe
rlsk ls unreasonable and Lhe acL ls negllgenL lf Lhe rlsk ls of such magnlLude as Lo ouLwelgh whaL Lhe law
regards as Lhe uLlllLy of Lhe acL or of Lhe parLlcular manner ln whlch lL ls done

292 Iactors Cons|dered |n Determ|n|ng Dt|||ty of Actor's Conduct

ln deLermlnlng whaL Lhe law regards as Lhe uLlllLy of Lhe acLor's conducL for Lhe purpose of deLermlnlng
wheLher Lhe acLor ls negllgenL Lhe followlng facLors are lmporLanL
(a) Lhe soclal value whlch Lhe law aLLached Lo Lhe lnLeresL whlch ls Lo be advanced or
proLecLed by Lhe conducL
(b) Lhe exLenL of Lhe chance LhaL Lhls lnLeresL wlll be advanced or proLecLed by Lhe parLlcular
course of conducL
(c) Lhe exLenL of Lhe chance LhaL such lnLeresL can be adequaLely advanced or proLecLed by
anoLher and less dangerous course of conducL

293 Iactors cons|dered |n Determ|n|ng ,agn|tude of |sk

ln deLermlnlng Lhe magnlLude of Lhe rlsk for Lhe purpose of deLermlnlng wheLher Lhe acLor ls negllgenL
Lhe followlng facLors are lmporLanL
(a) Lhe soclal value whlch Lhe law aLLaches Lo Lhe lnLeresLs whlch are lmperlled
(b) Lhe exLenL of Lhe chance LhaL Lhe acLor's conducL wlll cause an lnvaslon of any lnLeresL of
Lhe oLher or of one of a class of whlch Lhe oLher ls a member
(c) Lhe exLenL of Lhe harm llkely Lo be caused Lo Lhe lnLeresLs lmperlled
(d) Lhe number of persons whose lnLeresLs are llkely Lo be lnvaded lf Lhe rlsk Lakes effecL ln
harm
est (1h|rd) of 1orts L|ab|||ty for hys|ca| and Lmot|ona| narm

3 Neg||gence

A person acLs negllgenLly lf Lhe person does noL exerclse reasonable care under all Lhe clrcumsLances
rlmary facLors Lo conslder ln ascerLalnlng wheLher Lhe person's conducL lacks reasonable care are Lhe
foreseeable llkellhood LhaL Lhe person's conducL wlll resulL ln harm Lhe foreseeable severlLy of any
harm LhaL may ensue and Lhe burden of precauLlons Lo ellmlnaLe or reduce Lhe rlsk of harm

1he tandard of Care 1he easonab|e rudent erson
Ioqboo v ,eolove 1837 (hay rlck)
lssue wheLher Lhe flre had been occasloned by gross negllgence on Lhe parL of Lhe A lf he had acLed
bona flde Lo Lhe besL of hls [udgmenL
8ule all cases musL regard Lo cauLlon such as a reasonab|e man of ord|nary prudence would observe
ln deLermlnlng whaL a reasonable and prudenL man would do under Lhe clrcumsLances
you wlll remember LhaL presumably a [ury ls composed of such reasonable and prudenL
persons
uelolt v ,nAJoo 1936 (Llre blew)
lssue wheLher a parLlcular person ls negllgenL ln falllng Lo know LhaL hls Llres are ln Loo poor a condlLlon
for ordlnary operaLlon on Lhe hlghways (quesLlon/facL for [ury)
8ule lL ls lmperaLlve LhaL a duty or standard of care be seL up LhaL wlll be producLlve of safeLy for oLher
users of Lhe hlghway
erson's conducL ls deemed Lo have Lhe knowledge LhaL Lhe reasonable/ordlnary person
would have
@tlmotno v klelo 1982 (baLhLub glass)
lssue Supreme CourL would have afflrmed Lrlal courL and reversed appellaLe courL saylng LhaL
deLermlnlng wheLher u's noL replaclng Lhe glass Lub was negllgenL was rlghLly lefL up Lo Lhe [ury
8ules
unless prlor noLlce of Lhe danger came Lo Lhe As elLher from Lhe or by reason of a
slmllar accldenL ln Lhe bulldlng no duLy devolved on Lhe As Lo replace Lhe glass wlLher
under Lhe common law or under 78 of MulLlple uwelllng Law
CerLaln dangers have been removed by a cusLomary way of dolng Lhlngs safely Lhls
cusLom may be proved Lo show LhaL Lhe one charged wlLh Lhe derellcLlon has fa||en
be|ow the requ|red standard MusL bear whaL ls conducL under all Lhe clrcumsLances
Lhe qulnLessenLlal LesL of negllgence
When proof of an accepLed pracLlce ls accompanled by evldence LhaL Lhe A conformed
Lo lL Lhls may esLabllsh due care and conLrarlwlse when proof of a cusLomary pracLlce
ls coupled wlLh a showlng LhaL lL was lgnored and LhaL Lhls deparLure was a proxlmaLe
cause of Lhe accldenL lL may serve Lo esLabllsh llablllLy
robaLlve power of cusLom and usage


Class 16 1he 8easonable Man p 139174
otJos v leetless @toosottotloo o 1941 (vacanL 1axl cab)
lssue ls a person forced Lo make a qulck declslon ln an emergency negllgenL lf LhaL declslon dlrecLly
causes ln[ury Lo anoLher person?
8ule 1 negllgence lsfallure Lo exerclse LhaL care and cauLlon whlch a reasonable and prudenL person
ordlnarlly would exerclse under llke condlLlons or clrcumsLances"
8uLL2 negllgence ls noL absoluLe or lnLrlnslcbuL ls always relevanL Lo some clrcumsLances of Llme
place or person"
LML8CL-C? uCC18l-L Lhe law ln Lhls sLaLe does noL hold one ln an emergency Lo Lhe exerclse of LhaL
maLure [udgmenL requlred of hlm under clrcumsLances where he has an opporLunlLy for dellberaLe
acLlon Pe ls noL requlred Lo exerclse unerrlng [udgmenL whlch would be expecLed of hlm were he noL
confronLed wlLh an emergency requlrlng prompL acLlon"
-oLes
Lmergency uocLrlne
Speclal [ury lnsLrucLlon
A musL [usLlfy
1o quallfy as a sudden emergency Lhe evenL musL be unforeseen sudden and
unexpecLed
1he sudden emergency docLrlne ls merely an expresslon of Lhe reasonably prudenL
person sLandard of care lL expresses Lhe noLlon LhaL Lhe law requlres no more from an
acLor Lhan ls reasonable Lo expecL ln Lhe evenL of an emergency
lf Lhe emergency ls creaLed by Lhe negllgence of Lhe acLor Lhe emergency docLrlne does
noL apply
lL ls noL Lhe conducL afLer Lhe emergency has arlsen LhaL Lhe law does noL excuse buL
Lhe negllgenL conducL LhaL broughL lL abouL
kobetts v tote of lolslooo 1981 (8llnd man aL osL Cfflce)
lssue uoes Lhe sLandard of care for a bllnd person requlre LhaL Lhey use Lhelr cane and lf Lhey do noL
and cause someone ln[ury Lhey are llable?
8uLL 1 Lhe conducL of Lhe handlcapped lndlvldual musL be reasonable ln Lhe llghL of hls knowledge of
hls lnflrmlLy"
8uLL 2 (Lhe handlcapped person) musL Lake Lhe precauLlons be Lhey more or less whlch Lhe ordlnary
reasonable man would Lake lf he were bllnd"
A bllnd man may noL rely wholly upon hls oLher senses Lo warn hlm of danger buL musL
lse Lhe devlces usually employed Lo compensaLe for hls bllndness

koblosoo v lloJsoy 1979 (snowmoblle and lnLerLube)
lssue ls a mlnor operaLlng a snowmoblle held Lo an adulL sLandard of care?
8uLL1 SLClAL CPlLu S1A-uA8u lL would be a monsLrous docLrlne Lo hold LhaL a chlld of
lnexperlenceshould be held Lo Lhe same degree of care ln avoldlng danger as a person of maLure years
and accumulaLed experlence"p1602lnsLead you compare a chlld's conducL Lo LhaL expecLed of a
reasonably careful chlld of Lhe same age lnLelllgence maLurlLy Lralnlng and experlence
8uLL2 LxCL1lC- Lo SLClAL CPlLu S1A-uA8u When Lhe acLlvlLy Lhe chlld engages ln ls lnherenLly
dangerous as ls Lhe operaLlon

-oLes
An adulL acLlvlLy LhaL ls lnherenLly dangerous
8esL (1hlrd) 1orLs 3 yrs or younger lncapable of negllgence

teolq v Ametlnoo lomlly los o 1970 (lnsane drlver)
lssue ls lnsanlLy a form of defense LhaL can preclude llablllLy for negllgence?
8uLL Lhe affecL of Lhe menLal lllnessmusL be such as Lo affecL Lhe person's ablllLy Lo undersLand and
appreclaLe Lhe duLy whlch resLs upon hlmln addlLlon Lhere musL be an absence of noLlce or
forewarnlng Lo Lhe person LhaL he may be suddenly sub[ecL Lo such a Lype of lnsanlLy"
8uLL2 8ASlC l-SA-l1? 8uLL Lhe pollcy basls of holdlng a permanenLly lnsane person llable for hls LorL
ls 1 where one of Lwo lnnocenL person's musL suffer a loss lL should be borne by Lhe one who caused lL
and 2 Lo lnduce Lhose lnLeresLed ln Lhe lnsane person Lo resLraln and conLrol hlm and 3 Lhe fear LhaL
an lnsanlLy defense would lead Lo false clalms of lnsanlLy"
8uLL3 sLaLemenL LhaL lnsanlLy ls no defense ls Loo broad when applled Lo negllgence case where a
drlver ls suddenly overcome wlLhouL forewarnlng by a menLal dlsablllLy whlch lncapaclLaLes hlmlL ls
un[usL Lo hold a man responslble for hls conducL whlch he ls lncapable of avoldlng and whlchwas
unknown Lo hlm prlor Lo Lhe accldenL
MosL courLs do noL make any allowance for Lhe menLal lllness of Lhe A Lhe A ls [udged
by Lhe sLandard of Lhe reasonable person
Cne whose menLal faculLles are dlmlnlshed noL amounLlng Lo LoLal lnsanlLy ls capable
of conLrlbuLory negllgence buL ls noL held Lo Lhe ob[ecLlve reasonably person sLandard
8aLher such a person should be held only Lo Lhe exerclse of such care as he was capable
of exerclslng le Lhe sLandard of care of a person of llke menLal capaclLy under slmllar
clrcumsLances

C|ass 17 1he rofess|ona| p 174187
(8) 1he rofesslonal
eotb v wlft wloqs lon 1979
8ule Cne who engages ln a buslness occupaLlon or professlon musL exerclse Lhe requlslLe degree of
learnlng sklll and ablllLy of LhaL calllng wlLh reasonable and ordlnary care
-egllgence Lhe dolng of someLhlng or Lhe fallure Lo do someLhlng
ln Lhls case Lhe fallure Lo exerclse LhaL degree of ordlnary care and cauLlon whlch an
ordlnary prudenL plloL havlng Lhe some ttololoq and exetleone as Lhe experlenced
professlonal would have ln Lhe same or slmllar clrcumsLances
CuallLy or degree of care requlred varles slgnlflcanLly wlLh Lhe aLLendanL clrcumsLances
1he speclallsL wlLhln a professlon may be held Lo a sLandard of care greaLer Lhan LhaL
requlred of Lhe general pracLlLloner
Such ob[ecLlve sLandards avold Lhe evll of lmposlng a dlfferenL sLandard of care upon
each lndlvlduals
1he baslc prlnclples lnvolved are relaLlvely uncompllcaLed Lhe reasonable prudenL
person Lakes on Lhe professlon of Lhe acLor and an ob[ecLlve sLandard ls applled
1he sLandard ls expressed ln ob[ecLlve form Lhe knowledge Lralnlng and sklll (or ablllLy
and compeLence) of an ordlnary member of Lhe professlon ln good sLandlng
Crdlnarlly Lhe professlonal ls llable only for negllgence because Lhe servlce performed
does noL have a guaranLeed resulL
rofesslonal negllgence ls now commonly call malpracLlce
1he sLandard ls approprlaLely modlfled for speclallsLs ln a parLlcular professlon holdlng
Lhemselves ouL Lo have hlgher skllls
1he sLandard ls noL modlfled for professlonals provldlng Lhelr servlces to booo
WheLher Lhe paLlenL be a pauper or a mllllonalre wheLher he be LreaLed
graLulLously or for reward Lhe physlclan owes hlm preclsely Lhe same measure of
duLy and Lhe same degree of sklll and care
Plgher sLandard buL sLlll ob[ecLlve
*ordlnary prudenL person -C1 average
8equlres knowledge Lralnlng and sklll of ordlnary member of LhaL person
LxperL LesLlmony lf lay [ury ls noL ln poslLlon Lo undersLand wlLhouL asslsLance
SpeclallsL held Lo hlgher sLandard
oJqes v ottet 1934 (4 lnsurance pollcles)
lssue Were Lhe As (aLLorneys) negllgenL ln servlng process?
8ule An aLLorney who acLs ln good falLh and ln an honesL bellef LhaL hls advlce and acLs are well
founded and ln Lhe besL lnLeresL of hls cllenL ls noL answerable for a mere error of [udgmenL or for a
mlsLake ln a polnL of law whlch has noL been seLLled by Lhe courL of lasL resorL ln hls SLaLe and on whlch
reasonable doubL may be enLerLalned by welllnformed lawyers (aLLorney who acLs ln good falLh noL
llable)
3 areas where aLLorney's conducL may be quesLloned
1 ossesslon of knowledge or Sklll
2 Lxerclse of 8esL udgmenL
3 use of uue Care
lf you meeL sLandard of care noL llable for mere error ln [udgmenL
MlsLake ln pracLlce LhaL hasn'L been seLLle ln courL of law of LhaL sLaLe noL llable
oyne v towo 1938
lssue wheLher Laklng Lhe evldence as sLrongly as ls reasonably posslble ln supporL of 's Lheory of Lhe
cases as we musL do when Lhe courL lnsLrucLs a verdlcL ln favor of A Lhere was sufflclenL evldence Lo
susLaln a [udgmenL ln favor of s?
8ule negllgence on Lhe parL of a physlclan or surgeon by reason of hls deparLure from Lhe proper
sLandard of pracLlce musL be esLabllshed by experL medlcal LesLlmony unless Lhe negllgence ls so
grossly apparenL LhaL a layman would have no dlfflculLy ln recognlzlng lL
7 prlnclples Lo consLlLuLe malpracLlce p 184
lL ls noL enough LhaL an experL wlLness LesLlfy LhaL he would noL personally follow Lhe
A's pracLlce he musL also LesLlfy LhaL Lhe pracLlce dld noL conform wlLh Lhe sLandard of
care of an ordlnary member of Lhe professlon
lor Lhe professlons ln general evldence as Lo cusLomary pracLlce ls admlsslble and may
prove very lnfluenLlal
rofesslonal prudence ls deflned by acLual or accepLed pracLlce wlLhln a professlon
raLher Lhan Lheorles abouL whaL 'should' have been done
CommunlLy sLandard

Class 18 1he rofesslonal (conL) p 187204
,ottlsoo v ,onNomoto 1979 (u1l)
lssue Should Lhe defendanL be sub[ecL Lo Lhe local sLandard of care or Lhe naLlonal sLandard of care?
8ule -LW 8uLL! 1he defendanL musL exerclse Lhe degree of reasonable care and sklll expecLed of
members of Lhe medlcal professlon under Lhe same or slmllar clrcumsLances" 1he locallLy rule says LhaL
docLors should only be measured agalnsL oLher docLors ln Lhelr communlLy 1hls courL abandons Lhe
locallLy rule for Lhe flrsL Llme ln Lhls [urlsdlcLlon

-oLes
sLrlcL locallLy" rule sLaLe Lhe sLandard of knowledge and sklll ln Lerms of a pracLlLloner ln
good sLandlng ln Lhe local communlLy ln whlch Lhe A pracLlces
Whlle Lhere may be local tles of tontlne wlLhln Lhe varlous [udlclal dlsLrlcLs of our SLaLe
Lhere are no local stooJotJs of note
CrlLlcs charge LhaL Lhe sLrlcL locallLy rule enforced Lhe sLaLus quo of care ln any glven
communlLy served as a dlslncenLlve for Lhe elevaLlon of Lhe sLandard of care and
someLlmes made lL dlfflculL for Lhe Lo locaLe an experL wlLness lf physlclans wlLhln Lhe
same communlLy were relucLanL Lo LesLlfy agalnsL each oLher
Slmllar communlLy ln slmllar clrcumsLances" LesL deslgned Lo balance Lhe need Lo avold
evaluaLlng a general pracLlLloner ln a rural area by Lhe same sLandards as a speclallsL ln an
urban Leachlng hosplLal wlLh Lhe need of Lhe for access Lo experL LesLlmony
SLandard of care does noL focus on locallLy buL uses lL as one of facLors Lo be consldered
along wlLh advances ln professlon avallablllLy of faclllLles and wheLher healLh care provlder
was speclallsL or general pracLlLloner
Medlcal professlon lLself recognlzes naLlonal sLandards for speclallsLs LhaL are noL
deLermlned by geography Lhe law should follow sulL
nott v toJfotJ 1979 (1umor on uLerus)
lssue wheLher Cklahoma adheres Lo Lhe docLrlne of lnformed consenL as Lhe basls of an acLlon for
medlcal malpracLlce?
8ules of Law
AdequaLe lnformaLlon lncludes
lnformaLlon
AlLernaLlves
And collaLeral rlsks
uuLy on physlclan or surgeon Lo lnform a paLlenL of hls or her opLlons and Lhe rlsks lnvolved
lf breach of duLy physlclan responslble for consequences
lf no consenL baLLery
lf consenL buL no lnformaLlon negllgence
uuLy noL only of whaL he lnLends Lo do buL wheLher he should do lL
rofesslonal SLandard of Care" a physlclan needed only Lo lnform a paLlenL ln conformance
wlLh Lhe prevalllng medlcal pracLlce ln Lhe communlLy
SLandard 8easonable under Lhe clrcumsLances
8lMA lAClL lC8 LACk Cl l-lC8MLu CC-SL-1
uuLy Lo lnform
CausaLlon
ln[ury
lalnLlff musL prove
uefendanL falled Lo lnform adequaLely of maLerlal rlsk
lf lnformed of Lhe rlsk would noL have consenLed
ln[ured as a resulL

nformed consent A duty to obta|n an educated consent te|||ng the the prob|em the proposed
r|sk the proposed mode of procedure and poss|b|e a|ternat|ves so that they can dec|de to do the
treatment or not

,oote v @be keqeots of tbe Dolvetslty of ol 1990 (dr uslng organ for research)
lssue(s) WheLher Lhe df/dr ln seeklng pl's consenL Lo remove hls spleen and prlor Lo Lhe surgery
dlsclose hls personal economlc or research lnLeresL LhaL may affecL hls [udgmenL?
8ule(s) 1he paLlenL's consenL Lo LreaLmenL Lo be effecLlve musL be an lnformed consenL A-u ln
sollclLlng Lhe paLlenL's consenL a physlclan has a flduclary duLy Lo dlsclose all lnformaLlon maLerlal Lo
Lhe paLlenL's declslon
A physlclan who LreaLs a paLlenL ln whom he also has a research lnLeresL has poLenLlally
confllcLlng loyalLles
1he posslblllLy LhaL an lnLeresL exLraneous nonessenLlal Lo Lhe paLlenL's healLh has affecLed
Lhe physlclan's [udgmenL ls someLhlng LhaL a reasonable paLlenL would wanL Lo know prlor
Lo consenLlng
lL ls Lhe prerogaLlve of Lhe paLlenL noL Lhe physlclan Lo deLermlne Lhe dlrecLlon ln whlch he
belleves hls lnLeresLs lle
ulsclosure of remoLe rlsks LhaL are noL cenLral Lo Lhe declslon Lo admlnlsLer or re[ecL a
procedure ls noL requlred
Convers|on ls Lhe lnLenLlonal exerclse of domlnlon or conLrol over a chaLLel whlch so serlously
lnLerferes wlLh Lhe rlghL of anoLher Lo conLrol lL LhaL Lhe acLor may [usLly be requlred Lo pay Lhe oLher
Lhe full value of Lhe chaLLel Acqulrlng possesslon damaglng or alLerlng uslng lL recelvlng lL dlsposlng
lL mlsdellverlng lL refuslng Lo surrender lL are all means of converslon
Cood falLh ls noL a defense When demanded Lhe goods musL be reLurn Lhereby damages
are mlLlgaLed