Front | Back |
Policy Goals of Torts
|
1) Deterrence
2) Administrability 3) Compensation |
Injury
|
1) Physical injury to people
2) Injury to property |
General/Unqualified Duty
|
A duty to use reasonable care under the circumstances with regard to the physical well-being of another. Reasonable Foreseeability. Foreseeable risks to foreseeable victims.
|
Privity Rule
|
Has to do with the nature of the relationship of the parties in a case. Winterbottom v. Wright (must be in a contract to sue for products that are not imminently dangerous).
|
MacPherson case
|
Cardozo expands the Thomas definition of imminently dangerous from just a few products to include all objects that are imperfectly constructed. Makes Privity Rule no longer relevant.
|
Qualified Duty of Care
|
1) Affirmative Duty to Warn, Rescue or Protect
2) Premises Liability 3) Pure Economic Loss |
Affirmative Duty to Warn, Rescue or Protect
|
1) misfeasance
2) nonfeasance EXCEPTIONS: 1) Special Relationships 2) D created the peril to plaintiff 3) Voluntary Undertaking (D is trying to help protect) |
If a duty exists...we balance three factors
|
1) relationship between the parties
2) reasonable foreseeability of harm to persons injured 3) public policy concerns |
Premises Liability...traditional catagories
|
1) invitee-business purpose or mutual benefit of both parties.
2) licensee- social guest on site for their own benefit 3) trespasser-no permission to be on property. |
Duties owed to premises liability traditional catagories
|
1) invitee-must keep premises in reasonably safe conditions.
2) licensee-warn of any known hidden dangers 3) trespasser-generally no duty, but need to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring. |
Pure Economic Loss
|
Generally, no duty when dealing with the loss of potential income.
|
Exceptions to the General Rule of No Duty in Pure Economic Loss
|
Special Foreseeability Rules:
1) Special Relationships 2) Some Type of Contract in Place 3) Proximity |
Rowland Case
|
No longer embraces the traditional catagories of premises liability. Classifications do not negate the importance of all people's safety. People don't vary their behavior based on classifications.
|
Attractive Nuisance Doctrine (exception to trespasser rule)
|
Old Rule: an obligation not to have an attractive nuisance on one's land (children).
New Rule: if you can reasonably foresee a child will wander onto your property, you need to take reasonable precautions to protect them from harm (fence around a swimming pool). |
Breach of Duty (Reasonable Care Under the Circumstances)
|
1) General-Robust Objective Standard
2) Tailored |