Torts Principles & Liability Rules Flashcards

What is the primary purpose of tort law?

Answer: To compensate victims for harm caused by others

The primary purpose of tort law is to provide a civil remedy for individuals who have suffered harm or injury due to the wrongful acts of others. It aims to compensate the injured party (the plaintiff) for their losses, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering, thereby restoring them to their pre-injury state as much as possible. Unlike criminal law, tort law focuses on making the victim whole rather than punishing the wrongdoer.

Which of the following is a required element of negligence?

Answer: Breach of duty

Breach of duty is a core element of negligence, requiring the plaintiff to prove that the defendant failed to act with the reasonable care that a prudent person would have exercised under similar circumstances. This failure to meet the established standard of care is what makes the defendant's conduct legally blameworthy. Without a breach of duty, there is no basis for a negligence claim, even if harm occurred.

What is 'res ipsa loquitur' in tort law?

Answer: A presumption of negligence based on circumstantial evidence

Res ipsa loquitur, Latin for "the thing speaks for itself," is a legal doctrine in tort law that allows a presumption of negligence based on circumstantial evidence. It applies when an injury would not ordinarily occur without negligence, and the instrumentality causing the harm was under the defendant's exclusive control. This doctrine helps plaintiffs establish negligence when direct evidence of the defendant's specific negligent act is unavailable.

What is a common defense to intentional torts?

Answer: Consent

Consent is a common and effective defense to intentional torts such as battery, assault, and false imprisonment. If a plaintiff willingly and knowingly agreed to the act that caused their harm, they generally cannot later claim it was an intentional tort. This consent can be express (explicitly stated) or implied by the plaintiff's conduct or the circumstances.

Which tort involves false statements that harm a person’s reputation?

Answer: Defamation

Defamation is an intentional tort that involves making false statements about another person that harm their reputation. It encompasses both libel (written defamation) and slander (spoken defamation). To be actionable, the statement must be false, published to a third party, and cause actual damage to the plaintiff's reputation.

What does strict liability mean in tort law?

Answer: Liability without fault

Strict liability in tort law means that a defendant can be held liable for damages even if they did not act negligently or intend to cause harm. This doctrine is typically applied in cases involving abnormally dangerous activities (e.g., handling explosives) or defective products, where the risk of harm is so significant that the defendant is held responsible regardless of their level of care. It focuses on the act itself and the resulting harm, not the defendant's fault.

Which of the following is an example of an intentional tort?

Answer: Battery

Battery is an intentional tort defined as the intentional harmful or offensive touching of another person without their consent. The key element is the intent to make contact, even if there was no intent to cause harm. Unlike negligence, which involves a lack of reasonable care, battery requires a deliberate act by the defendant.

What is the tort of nuisance concerned with?

Answer: Interference with property use

The tort of nuisance is concerned with substantial and unreasonable interference with another person's use and enjoyment of their land. This interference can stem from various activities, such as excessive noise, odors, or pollution, that diminish the quality of life or value of the property. It focuses on the impact on the property owner's rights, rather than direct physical injury to a person.

Which of the following must be proven in a product liability case under strict liability?

Answer: That the product was unreasonably dangerous and caused injury

In a product liability case based on strict liability, the plaintiff does not need to prove that the manufacturer was negligent. Instead, they must demonstrate that the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous when it left the manufacturer's control, and that this defect directly caused their injury. The focus is on the product's condition and its causal link to the harm, not the manufacturer's conduct.