New version page

FSU BUL 3350 - Tort

Documents in this Course
Load more
Upgrade to remove ads

This preview shows page 1-2-3 out of 9 pages.

Save
View Full Document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Upgrade to remove ads
Unformatted text preview:

This being law class, in good humor, I, Harrison am hereby not held responsible for the outcomes of any results on any exams. I am not in any way tied to Florida State University or Professor Stauber. This study guide is simply all of my class notes and common knowledge simplified into a study guide. Good luck, and remember to review your own class notes as well.P 47-69TortA tort is a civil wrong, other than breach of contract for which the law provides a remedy in the form of a lawsuit for money damages. (if you do something wrong to me (a tort) I can sue you. Tort comes from the word tortus meaning crooked and twistedA tort involves direct interference with a person, property, or intangible interests (privacy, lies about someone)Tort Liability: Includes- Intentional tort: like assault/battery- Negligence: Will discuss in detail later- Strict (even) Liability: very dangerous activity. *though you didn’t mean to harm someone, you’re going to have to pay for it (mostly in money)Intentional TortsAssault: intentional act of putting another person in apprehension for his physical safety: (instilling fear in someone, pointing a gun, threatening to hit, etc.) There must be PRESENT FEAR and present, apparent ability to carry out this threat. *the same act can be both a tort and a crime if guilt can be proven Battery: intentional touching of another person without consent or justification (includes projectiles) “justification” above refers to law enforcement officials’ right to touch you if there is reasonable causeBattery does not apply if there is consent: different types below…- Expressed: by words (written or said)- Implied: by conduct (like touching during pickup basketball/football, basically where touching is permitted)- Informed consent: consent without knowledge is no consent at all (just what it says, can refer to surgery where there is no knowledge of actual procedure) Cases:Boyfriend attacks girlfriend with alligator and strikes her with it. Charged guilty of battery even though weapon was unusual Doctor was using surgery marker to write UK (in reference to the university of Kentucky) on patients uteruses that he was removing to save their lives. A patient discovered and sued for battery (unwanted touching). It was argued that he did not actually harm her, rather he was saving her life, and that writing on her organ may have been degrading, but it is not harmful or consequential touching. The case was later privately settled*can there be battery without assault or assault without battery? Yes, one can threaten to shoot or hit someone and not actually do it just like someone can shoot someone in the back without ever actually threatening themDamages In Intentional Tort Cases- Actual: compensatory: wage losses and property damages- Punitive: punishing/deterrence: criminal law. - *the largest compensatory amount was in a case against a tobacco company that was $100 billion*recall the case dealing with a Dr. Courtney who watered down his patients’ chemotherapy medicine to make a larger profit. He was sued for all of his assets ($12 million) and also was guilty on multiple counts of FRAUD. Aka: a case where he was had to pay actually and punitively False Imprisonment: defined as: intentional confinement or restraint of a person without consent or justification. The restraint of liberty- The most common case of this is in shoplifting cases where the owner or security guard holds a person when they in fact haven’t stolen anything- We discussed a case where Reese Witherspoon sued for false imprisonment when the paparazzi did not allow her to drive as she wanted thus restraining her libertyAbuse of Process: groundless institution of CIVIL proceedings against a person: This is when someone sues you non-stop just to annoy you and cause you distress. There is a law to protect against this: the VEXATIOUS LITIGANT LAW. (vexatious meaning spiteful) To be classified as a vexatious litigant you have to:- You have sued the same defendant five or more times in the last five years - Must have lost five or more of these cases- You have defended yourself pro se (you defended yourself)- Not small claimsIf the person qualifies as a vexatious litigant as determined above, then:- You must compensate the defendant for lawyer’s fees and wage losses- You must have judge’s approval before you can continue (pre-filing order)- You can be found guilty of contempt of courtDefamation: damage to reputation: when someone tells something false to a third party. Requires three or more people. There is three types: - Slander: oral defamation- Libel: written defamation- Defamacast: new word meaning to defame in the manner of broadcast - Defamation Per Se (intrinsically): o Accusation of a crime (automatically defaming)o Statement that degrades person in business/profession (calling a Doctor a Quack)o Accusation of Having a loathsome disease: (the herp) - Privilege: immunity from defaming someoneo Absolute: even if the speaker is false, in these cases the speaker is immune from a defamation charge: JUDICIAL and LEGISLATIVE hearings (obviously if person honestly believes what they are testifying is true) this is to ensure that people aren’t too afraid to testify. o Qualified: Immunity by meeting the three following criteria: Statement is made in good faith AND Statement made by person with legitimate interest AND Statement made in reasonable manner*Recall the case where a cashier sued her manager for defamation after he accused her of stealing from the cash register. Most importantly, it was a defamation case because it was made in front of customers thus the cashier was embarrassed. The manager pleaded that the criteria for qualified immunity were met, but only the first two were met as the statement was not made in a reasonable manner. Owner to cashier: “you are not ringing up the cash in the register” (stealing)Cashier to owner: “are you accusing me of stealing?”Owner to cashier: “well you’re not ringing up the cash” (accused cashier of stealing in the manner that he said this)- Suits made by public officials/public figures require a showing of malice: a reckless disregard for the truth or falseness of the statement: o Recall case where UGA and AL coaches were accused in New York Times of fixing games. o Why don’t celebs then sue tabloids like the national Enquirer and such? Because no one takes these stories to be true. (NYT is a legit source)o Remember the


View Full Document
Download Tort
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Tort and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Tort 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?