business law 3

threat of immediate harm or offensive contact, orany action that arouses reasonable apprehension of imminent harm. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

unathourized and harmful or offensive contact with another person. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

if a person intends to injure one person but harms another person the law transfers the perpetrators intent from the target to victim.

intentional confinement or restraint of another person without authority or justification or without that persons consent. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

• permit businesses to stop, detain, and investigate suspected shoplifters if:
• reasonable grounds for suspicion
• suspects detained only for a reasonable time
• investigations are conducted in a reasonable manner

refers to appropriating another person's name or identity for commercial purposes without consent; tort of appropriation. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

unwarranted and undesired publicity of a private fact about a person. does not have to be untrue, truth is not a defense. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

defendant makes untrue statement of fact about the plaintiff that is published to a third party. truth is an absolute defense. two type; slander(oral) and libel(written). INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

the plaintiffs must prove the additional element of malice.

wrongdoer decieves another person out of money, property, or something else of value. a person who has been injuredby an intentional misrepresentation can recover damages from the wrongdoer. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

• wrongdoer made false representation of material fact
• wrongdoer had knowledge that the representation was false and intended to decieve the innocent party.
• innocent party justifiably relied on the misrepresentation
• innocent party was injured

involves extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly done that causes severe emotional distress. some states require manifestaion in physical injury. tort of outrage. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

a successful defendant in a prior lawsuit can sue the plaintiff if the first lawsuit was frivolous. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PERSONS

involves interference with a landowners right to exclusive possesion of land. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PROPERTY

trespass involves person injures another persons personal property or interferes with that persons enjoyment of his or her property. conversion involves taking over another persons personal property and depriving the enjoyment of it. INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST PROPERTY.

• "omission to do something which a reasonableman would do or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do" to establish negligence, plaintiff must prove:
• defendant owed a duty of care to plaintiff
• the defendant breached his duty
• the plaintiff suffered injury
• defendants negligent act was actual cause for plaintiffs injury
• defendants negligent act was the proximate cause of plaintiffs injury. defendant only liable for foreseeable consequences

refers to obligation people owe each other, that is, not to cause any inreasonable harm or risk of harm

failure to exercise care; may consist of action or failure to act when there is a duty to act.

must be actual cause or causation in fact of plaintiffs injuries

under the law, negligent party in not neccesarily liable for all damages set in motion by his or her act. law establishes a point along the damage chain after which the negligent party in no longer responsible for consequences of his or her actions. a sort of limited liability

doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants, ect. owe a duty of ordinary care in providing services. judged by a reasonable professional standard and are liable if breached. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

• a person witness may sue negligent party who caused accident to recover from emotional distress. must prove:
• relative was killed or injured by the defendant
• plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress
• mental distress resulted from observence of accident. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

a statute or ordinance establishes duty of care and violation of this statute or ordinance is negligence per se. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

presumption of negligence is established if the defendant had exclusive control of the insturmentality or situation that caused the plaintiff injury that would not have normally occurred if not for negligence. . SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

relieve doctors and other medical professionals from liability for negligence in emergency situations

state statutes that make taverns and bartenders liable for damage caused by overly inebrieated patrons. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

driver of a vehicle is not liable for ordinary negligence to passengers he gratuitously transports; liable for gross negligence. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

if injured in line of duties not able to sue person whose negligence cause injury or damage. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

person injured while going to someones rescue may not sue person who caused dangerous situation. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

social hosts liable for damages caused by intoxicated guests. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

• landowners and tenants owe:
• invitees a duty of ordinary care
• licensees a duty of ordinary care
• trespassers a duty not to willfully and wontonly injure trespassers. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

have duty of utmost care to protect passengers and patrons from harm. SPECIAL NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINES

superseding event is an intervening event caused by another person that caused the plaintiffs injuries and relieves defendant from liability. DEFENSES AGAINST NEGLIGENCE

not liable for plaintiffs injuries if plaintiff had knowledge of a specific risk and voluntarily assumed the risk. DEFENSES AGAINST NEGLIGENCE

plaintiff partially liable for causing his or her own injuries and cannot recover against the negligent defendant. DEFENSES AGAINST NEGLIGENCE

much like contributory negligence but damages are apportioned according to fault. DEFENSES AGAINST NEGLIGENCE

liability without fault; applied to dangerous activities and defendant cannot be held liable. DEFENSES AGAINST NEGLIGENCE

federal statute that provides that federal gvmt is liable for its actions in most cases.