Tort Law
Jody Blanke
Professor of Computer Information
Systems and Law
Torts
 Strict Liability
 Intentional Torts
 Negligence
Strict Liability
 Liability without fault
 neither intent nor negligence need be
shown
 Ultrahazardous activities
 e.g., dynamite blasting
 e.g., ownership of wild animals
 lions and tigers and bears …
Intentional Torts




Battery
Assault
False Imprisonment
Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress
Defamation
 Libel and slander
 Truth is a defense
 Against media defendants, public
officials and public figures must show
“actual malice”
 e.g., Richard Jewell - Wikipedia, CourtTV
Invasion of Privacy
 Appropriation of name or
likeness
 e.g., Michael Jordan Wine
 Intrusion upon seclusion
 e.g., Jackie O, Holiday Inn,
Mazzio’s Pizza, Sean Penn, Bill
Gates, Bob Dylan, Katz, Kyllo
 False light
 e.g., Parade Magazine Teenage
Prostitution
 Publication of private
embarrassing facts
 e.g., “Joe Hero”
Silvia Leyva at Café Intermezzo
Trespass
 Trespass to land
 Conversion
 Trespass to personal property
(trespass to chattels)
Interference with Contractual
Relations
 $10.5B award against Texaco for
interfering with Penzoil’s contract to
buy Getty (later settled for $3B)
 “Ditch the dish”
Negligence




Duty
Breach of Duty
Causation
Injury
Duty of Care
 Reasonable person standard
 Is there a legal duty?
 e.g., Lady Di, Seinfeld finale, Good
Samaritan laws
 Invitees, licensees, trespassers
Breach of Duty
 What would the reasonable person do
in similar circumstances?
 Professional standard – malpractice
 Negligence per se
 Res ipsa loquitur
Causation
 Actual cause (causation in fact)
 “but for” analysis
 e.g., Rube Goldberg cartoons, Mouse Trap
Causation
 Proximate cause (legal cause)
 foreseeabilty
 e.g., Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad
 e.g., Crankshaw v. Piedmont Driving Club
Injury
 Plaintiff must prove injury
 Injury need not be personal injury
Defenses to Negligence
 Assumption of Risk
 Fellow-Servant Rule
 Contributory Negligence
 e.g., the “rolling stop”
 Comparative Negligence
 pure comparative negligence
 modified comparative negligence (50%
rule)
Product Liability
 Warranty (contract) law
 Negligence
 Strict liability
Rationale
 Stream of commerce theory
 manufacturer hopes to profit; must pay
price
 Last best chance
 manufacturer in best position to prevent
injury
 Economic theory
 dangerous products will price themselves
out of market
Lawn Darts
Early Cases
 MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
(1916)
 eliminated privity of contract
requirement
 consumer can sue manufacturer
 Greenman v. Yuba Power Products
(1963)
 applied strict liability in tort
 Manufacturer responsible for product it
places in the market
Restatement (Second) of Torts
 § 402A provides
 1. One who sells any product in a defective condition
unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or
to his property is subject to liability for physical harm
thereby caused to the ultimate user or consumer, or
to his property, if
 (a) the seller is engaged in the business of selling such
a product, and
 (b) it is expected to and does reach the user or
consumer without substantial change in the condition in
which it is sold.
 2. The rule stated in Subsection (1) applies although
 (a) the seller has exercised all possible care in the
preparation and sale of his product, and
 (b) the user or consumer has not bought the product
from or entered into any contractual relation with the
seller.
Restatement (Third) of Torts
 Defines “defect”
 A product is defective when, at the time
of sale or distribution, contains a
manufacturing defect, is defective in
design, or is defective because of
inadequate instructions or warnings
Manufacturing Defect
 Failure to meet design specifications
 e.g., Inspected by 17
Design Defect
 Faulty design
 e.g., Ford Pinto
Inadequate Warning
 Failure to warn
 e.g., guns and peanut butter
Defenses
 Assumption of Risk
 Comparative Fault
 Misuse