Torts and Negligence Flashcards

Which of the following is the best definition of 'private nuisance' under Oregon tort law?

Answer: A substantial and unreasonable interference with a private person's use and enjoyment of their land

Private nuisance requires a showing that the interference with land use is both substantial and unreasonable, balancing the harm to the plaintiff against the utility of the defendant's conduct.

Under Oregon law, a defendant is strictly liable for harm caused by 'abnormally dangerous activities.' Which of the following factors is LEAST relevant to determining whether an activity is abnormally dangerous?

Answer: The defendant's subjective intent to harm others

Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities does not depend on the defendant's intent; it focuses on the nature of the activity's risk and social utility.

A plaintiff brings a negligence per se claim in Oregon. What must the plaintiff show?

Answer: That the defendant violated a statute designed to protect against the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff belongs to the protected class

Negligence per se requires that the violated statute was intended to protect the class of persons to which the plaintiff belongs against the type of harm that occurred.

In Oregon, which statement best describes the 'firefighter's rule'?

Answer: Firefighters and police officers generally cannot sue the person whose negligence created the risk that required their professional response

The firefighter's rule bars professional rescuers from suing the person whose negligence created the emergency requiring their response, though Oregon has modified this rule by statute.

A plaintiff claims intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) in Oregon. Which element is REQUIRED?

Answer: Extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant intended to cause severe emotional distress

IIED in Oregon requires extreme and outrageous conduct, intent to cause or reckless disregard of the probability of causing severe emotional distress, and resulting severe emotional distress.

A defendant punches the plaintiff in the face. The plaintiff sues for battery. The defendant claims they were defending themselves. For self-defense to succeed in Oregon, the defendant must show:

Answer: They reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of unlawful bodily harm and used proportionate force

Self-defense in tort requires a reasonable belief of imminent unlawful harm and the use of proportionate force — subjective belief alone is insufficient.

In Oregon, which of the following accurately describes the 'loss of chance' doctrine in medical malpractice cases?

Answer: It allows a plaintiff to recover damages proportional to the reduced chance of a better outcome caused by the defendant's negligence

Oregon recognizes the loss of chance doctrine, allowing recovery proportional to the statistical reduction in the chance of a better outcome caused by the defendant's negligence.