MBE Elements/Numbered Lists - WTF

• (i) the promisor should reasonably expect it to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee or a third person,
• (ii) the promise does induce such action or forbearance, and
• (iii) injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise

• Sale
• Gift
• Devise
• Intestate Succession

• May be terminated by the occurrence of an event
• Is capable of lasting forever but also of being terminated early
• A condition will cut short the fee simple

• 1. Tenancy in Common
• 2. Joint Tenancy
• 3. Tenancy by the Entirety

• Possession: Requires every joint tenant have an equal right to possess the whole of the property
• Interest:  Joint tenants must have an equal share of the same type of interest
• Time:  Joint Tenants must receive their interests at the same time
• Title:  Joint tenants must receive their interests in the dame instrument of title

• 1) Tenancy at will
• 2) Tenancy for Years
• 3) Tenancy at Sufferance
• 4) Periodic Tenancy

• The tenant voluntarily leaves
• The landlord evicts the tenant
• The landlord re-rents to the tenant

• 1. pay rent
• 2. avoid waste

• 1) Premises are destroyed,so long as the tenant didn’t cause the damage
• 2) The landlord completely or partially evicts the tenant
• 3) the landlord materially breaches the lease

• 1) The premises were unusalbe for their intended purpose
• 2) The tenant notified the landlord of the problem
• 3) the landlord does not correct the problem; and
• 4) the tenant vacates the premises after a reasonable amount of time has passed

• Continuous for the statutory period
• open and notorious
• hostile to the true owner
• exclusive possession

• Act
• Intent
• Causation of harm

• (i) the accident was of a kind that ordinarily does not occur in the absence of negligence;
• (ii) it was caused by an agent or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant; and
• (iii) it was not due to any action on the part of the plaintiff.

• of or concerning the plaintiff,
• is published to a third party who understands its defamatory nature; and
• damages the plaintiff’s reputation.

• The duration and extent of the interference;
• Defendant's intent to assert a right inconsistent with the rightful possessor;
• Defendant's good faith;Expense or inconvenience to the plaintiff; and
• Extent of the harm

• An unreasonable interference with a right common to the public as a whole
• The plaintiff has been harmed in a special or unique way, different from the public
• If something is interfering with the right of the public as a whole, presumptively the public agencies should deal with it

• When a person acts:
• 1) Intending to confine or restrain another within fixed boundaries;
• 2) Those actions directly or indirectly result in such confinement; and
• 3) The other is either aware of the confinement or is harmed by it.

• 1) A person voluntarily aids or rescues another
• 2) A person places another in danger, even non-negligently
• 3) To perform contractual obligations with due care
• 4) One with actual ability and authority to control another
• 5) Defendants with a special relationship to plaintiffs (e.g.,common carrier-passenger; innkeeper-guest)

• 1) When a statute imposes upon a person a specific standard of care;
• 2) Defendant is liable if the person injured is in the class of persons protected by the statute;
• 3) The harm is the type of harm that statute is intended to prevent;and
• 4) The violation of that statute was a proximate cause of the harm.

• 1) Trespasser: none, except to not engage in willful, wanton, or reckless disregard for their safety
• 2) Licensee: Duty to warn of hidden dangers
• 3) Invitee: duty of ordinary due care

• A land possessor may be liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if:
• 1) An artificial condition exists in a place where the land possessor knows or has reason to know that children are likely to trespass;
• 2) The land possessor knows or has reason to know that the condition poses an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily injury to children;
• 3) The children, because of their youth, do not discover or cannot appreciate the danger presented by the condition;
• 4) The utility to the land possessor of maintaining the condition and the burden of eliminating the danger are slight compared to the risk of harm presented to children;and
• 5) The land possessor fails to exercise reasonable care to protect children from the harm.

• 1) Cause in fact
• 2) proximate cause (or "scope of liability")

• (i) the defendant provided false information,
• (ii) as a result of the defendant’s negligence,
• (iii) during the course of his business or profession,
• (iv) causing the plaintiff to justifiably rely upon the information, and
• (v) the plaintiff either is in a contractual relationship with the defendant or is a third party known by the defendant as one for whose benefit the information is supplied.

• 1. Promoting the general welfare is not a power of congress
• 2. the federal government does not have a general police power
• 3. The "necessary and proper clause" is not a free-standing power of congress. It works only as an add-on to some other legislative power

• Congress has the power to declare war and the power to maintain the Army and Navy.
• Congress has the power to provide for military discipline of United States armed forces members.
• Congress can provide for military trial of enemy combatants and enemy civilians.
• Congress cannot provide for military trial of U.S. civilians.

• Pardon power - can pardon for federal offenses
• Veto Power - POTUS has 10 days to veto legislation. Overriding a veto takes 2/3 of the other assholes.
• Appointment or Removal of Federal Officers - only POTUS can hire or fire his/her minions.

• Forbids serious discrimination against out of state individuals, absent substantial justification.
• Does not protect out-of-state corporations.
• “Serious discrimination” typically involves employment.

• 1) There is no discrimination against out-of-state interests;
• 2) The regulation does not unduly burden interstate commerce; and
• 3) The regulation does not apply to wholly extraterritorial activity. (wholly beyond state borders)

• The state acts as a market participant, buying and selling goods.
• Subsidies—A state can always choose to subsidize only its own citizens (for example, welfare benefits or in-state college tuition).
• Congressional approval - if Congress authorizes or consents to the discrimination, it's legal.

• 1) Must be a substantial nexus between the taxing state and the property or activity to be taxed
• 2) Must be a fair apportionment of tax liability among states

• Government cannot facilitate private discrimination
• Government cannot profit from private discrimination
• Government cannot enforce a private agreement to discriminate
• But, government is NOT required to prevent private discrimination

• 1) The individual interests at stake (life, liberty, property);
• 2) The value of the procedure in protecting that interest; and
• 3) The government interest in efficiency and cost.

• Is the law necessary for a compelling government interest?
• Implicit in strict scrutiny is the requirement for the least restrictive means.
• When strict scrutiny applies, the government bears the burden of proof. The government must show that the interest is compelling and the law is necessary to that interest.
• Applies when there is a suspect classification or a fundamental right

• Is the law substantially related to an important government interest?
• Applies to classifications based on gender and legitimacy

• Is the law rationally related to a legitimate interest?
• The challenger bears the burden of proof.
• Applies to all other cases (residual test)

• Remember "FIAT:" 
• First degree murder, 
• In Choate crimes ("CATS" - conspiracy, attempt, and solicitation)) 
• Assault w/ intent to commit a battery 
• Theft offenses (larceny, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, and robbery)

larceny by force or intimidation, taking the property from the person or in the presence of the victim. The force need not be great, but must be more than the amount necessary to effectuate taking and carrying away the property.

unlawful application of force to another person that causes bodily harm to that person.

intentionally placing another in apprehension of imminent bodily harm. The victim’s apprehension must be reasonable.

the intent to permanently deprive the person who owns the property of the property that is taken. The intent to permanently deprive must be present at the time of the taking.

an agreement to accomplish an unlawful purpose plus the intent to accomplish that purpose. The Model Penal Code (MPC) and the majority rule require a legal or illegal overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

the defendant was the actual and proximate cause of the victim’s death. If the victim would not have died but for the defendant’s act, then the defendant’s act is the actual cause of the killing. To prove proximate cause, the death must be foreseeable. A defendant’s conduct is deemed to be foreseeable if death is the natural and probable result of the conduct. Actions by a third party (e.g., medical malpractice by the doctor treating the victim) are generally foreseeable.

an unintentional homicide committed with criminal negligence or during an unlawful act. Criminal negligence is grossly negligent action that puts another person at a significant risk of serious bodily injury or death. It requires more than ordinary negligence for tort liability and something less than the extremely negligent conduct required for depraved-heart murder.

grossly negligent action that puts another person at a significant risk of serious bodily injury or death.

• i) The proximity of the area to the home;
• ii) Whether the area is included within an enclosure surrounding the home;
• iii) The nature of the uses to which the area is put; and
• iv) The steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by passersby

• The 7 "ESCAPES" are:
• Exigent circumstances
• Search incident to arrest
• Consent
• Automobiles
• Plain view
• Evidence obtained from administrative searches
• Stop and frisk

• (i) the representation of a defendant by the defendant's attorney must fall below an objective standard of reasonableness, and
• (ii) the attorney's deficient performance prejudiced the defendant.

• either
• (i) that the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search and, as a result, may pose an actual and continuing threat to the officer’s safety or a need to preserve evidence from being tampered with by the arrestee or
• (ii) that it is reasonable that evidence of the offense of arrest might be found in the vehicle.

because of a defect of reason due to a mental disease, the defendant did not know at the time either the nature and quality of the act or the wrongfulness of the act.

• (1) obtaining title
• (2) to the property (including money) of another person
• (3) through the reliance of that person on a known false representation
• (4) of a material past or present fact,
• (5) when the representation is made with the intent to defraud.

• (i) an agreement,
• (ii) between two or more persons,
• (iii) to accomplish an unlawful purpose,
• (iv) with the intent to accomplish that purpose.

• (i) repudiate prior aid,
• (ii) do all that is possible to countermand prior assistance, and
• (iii) do so before the chain of events is in motion and unstoppable.
• A mere change of heart, a flight from the crime scene, an arrest by law enforcement, or an uncommunicated decision to withdraw is ineffective.

an unintentional killing committed with reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life.