What is a tort hint it s not a Venetian confection A civil wrong which unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm Results in liability Are usually individuals suing each other or businesses suing each other If its not a contract or crime it s a tort What is the question that tort law seeks to answer Seeks to answer who should pay When someone gets hurt or property is damaged Classes Intentional negligence and strict liability What classes of torts are based on fault Intentional faults and negligence What classification of torts is not based on fault Strict Liability What does respondent superior mean let the master answer meaning when an employee commits a tort the employer is liable When will an employer be liable for the torts committed by its employee Employer will be liable for the torts of employee who is acting within scope of their employment Scope of Employment Test Does not take away from employees liability Can you think of a reason why the law should make someone who is otherwise free from fault the employer pay for the torts of another the employee This last question requires you to put your thinking cap on and ponder a bit which is fun don t you think Try thinking about it from the viewpoint of public policy Or try visualizing the world under a different say opposite rule Terms of money suing one employee vs the company the victim would not get as much money to help with injuries Reasons employer to have liability insurance vs having each person paying more taxes to be able to cover those expenses Debra Agis v Howard Johnson Company Parties Agis sued Howard Johnson Co and Roger Dionne her manager to recover mental damages from her summary dismissal Facts Agis was an employee at ground round A meeting was held by Dionne He informed the waitresses that stealing was going on and until assailants were discovered he would begin terminating the waitress s in ABC order Issue Did Howard Johnson Company s termination of Agis amount to Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Holding By testing the rules stated below the court felt Agis had a case The court ruled it would be up to a jury to determine liability in this case and that Agis must be given an opportunity to prove allegations she has made Rationale In order for a plaintiff to prevail in a case for liability under this tort four elements must be established 1 that the actor indented to inflict emotional distress 2 conduct was extreme and outrageous 3 that the actions of the defendant were the cause of the plaintiff s distress 4 that the emotional distress sustained by the plaintiff was severe Janice Rushing v Hershey Chocolate Memphis Background Rushing was employed by Hershey for 17 years She consented to and took a urinalysis drug testing The results were inconclusive Rushing refused to submit to additional urinalysis She was terminated Action Rushing filed for wrongful discharge based on a Right to Privacy U S District Court granted Hershey a dismissal Rushing appealed to the U S Court of Appeals Judge Clay Rushing s claim fails for two reasons 1 there was no intrusion 2 Rushing s urinalysis test results were not a matter which she had a right to keep private in an employment setting Invasion of Privacy 4 rights 1 Intrusion into Seclusion A physical or nonphysical intentional or negligent intrusion onto plaintiff s property or plaintiff s seclusion and that the intrusion was highly offensive to a reasonable person The interest to be protected is the right to be left alone 2 Public Disclosure of Private Facts The unwanted disclosure of a fact about a person which the person has the right to keep private eg Publishing bank statements or medical analyses 3 False Light in the Public Eye Occurs when the tortfeaser publicly attributes false opinions statements or actions to another individual 4 Appropriation The use by one person of another person s name likeness or other identifying characteristic without permission and for the benefit of the user Dispargement False statements that injure a person s interest in a property as opposed to one s reputation for example saying a store has gone out of business when it has not and causing the store damages in loss of business Palming off is unfair trade practice of passing off mock goods as the goods of another Interference with Contract 1 Defendant is aware of contract between Plaintiff and 3rd party 2 intentionally acts to interfere with that contract Trespass is to enter the owner s land or property without permission a wrongful interference with the possession of property personal property and realty Conversion is wrongfully taking or retaining possession of an individual s personal property and placing it in the service of another Nuisance is substantial or unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of an interest in land Wrongful discharge is a tort recognized in some states committed when an employer discharges an employee in violation of a clear expression of public policy Defenses to Intentional Torts Consent and Privilege a defendant can avoid liability by proving either plantiff consented to defendants conduct or defendant was privileged to do what otherwise be an intentional tort Negligence Unintentional conduct that falls below the standard of care that is necessary to protect others against exposure to an unreasonable risk of a foreseeable injury Unreasonable conduct that caused foreseeable risk of harm Four defenses to negligence 1 Duty exists to make sure persons exercise the degree of care that a reasonable and prudent person would exercise under similar circumstances 2 Breach of Duty the failure to use the degree of care that would have been used by a reasonable person Reasonable person test and use standard of care an external flexible standard that puts it in hands of jury 3 4 Causation Determined by the jury plaintiff must prove the defendant s conduct caused injury 1 Actual Cause direct causal connection and 2 Proximate Cause reasonably foreseen by the defendant Is it foreseeable that the action would cause what it did Has to be injury Substantial factor test was it a substantial cause of bringing about the result to the person Example of Negligence Case Sutton V Roth LLC and McDonalds Corporation 2010 Brief Customer suffered burns from eating sandwich and sued for negligence Holding Granted summary judgment in favor of McDonalds and granted judgment as a matter of law in favor of Roth Appeals court vacated judgment Critical Facts