OUCH!
Harmful or offensive contact
Battery
Duty of reasonable care
Duty
Falling below a standard of reasonable care for an ordinarily prudent person
Breach
But for causation and the proximate causation of the injury
Causation
What happens to damages when plaintiff is also negligent?
Damages are reduced
Confining plaintiff in a fixed set of boundaries for an appreciable length of time without their consent
False Imprisonment
Affirmative creation of risk through action
Malfeasance
By statutes, direct evidence, customs, or circumstantial evidence
How can breach be proven?
Natural consequence- type of injury must be reasonably foreseeable
Proximate causation
Not commonly used as it completely bars plaintiff from recovery if they have any responsibility
Contributory Negligence
intentional interference with someone's personal property with the intent to deprive the owner of their property Completely destroying item so it no longer serves original value
Conversion to chattels
Creating harm through inaction
Nonfeasance
Martin- safety statutes- must be obeyed
Tedla- rule of the road/ convenience statutes- don't have to be obeyed if doing so would be more dangerous than not
Martin v. Tedla statutes
TYPE of injury has to be reasonably foreseeable, the EXTENT of the injuries need not be
Rule of forseeability
Plaintiffs recovery is reduced by their % of fault
Pure comparitive fault
Intentionally interfering with another's lawful possession of chattel
Diminishing value/ needing to repair
Trespass to chattels
(Ex. Social guests serving a social purpose) reasonable care- warn of known dangers
Duty to licensees
When the accident wouldn't ordinarily occur without a breach and the instrumentality was within the sole control of the defendant
Elements of Res Ipsa Loquitur
Plaintiff can recover whatever harm they suffered regardless of susceptibility
Eggshell plaintiff rule
Insolvent defendant's liability will be apportioned to the other defendants; allowing plaintiff to recover full damages
Joint and several liability
High degree of risk: Does the activity have a high potential for serious harm?
Gravity of potential harm: How severe could the potential injuries be?
Inability to eliminate risk: Can the risk of harm be completely avoided by exercising reasonable care?
Common usage: Is the activity commonly practiced in the area?
Appropriateness of location: Is the activity suitable for the location where it is being conducted?
Strict liability
Special relationship or financial relationship, affirmative undertaking, or creation of risk
What circumstances increase a duty of care?
1. Plaintiff is a member of the class for whose benefit the statute was enacted
2. Recognizing a private right of action would be consistent with the statutory purpose
3. Recognition of the private right of action would be consistent with the legislative scheme
Uhr Factors
Breaks the chain of causation
Superseding cause
Expressed- exculpatory agreements- completely barring recovery of negligence
Implied- activity has inherent risks that are assumed by participation
Assumption of the risk