PA 106 – Unit 4
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
1
A tort is a civil wrong. In other words it is an
injury designed to provide compensation for
that injury.
 There are intentional and unintentional
(negligence) torts.
 A tortfeasor is one who commits a tort.

PA 106 -- Kaplan University
2
The person committing the tort, the
Tortfeasor or Defendant, must “intend” to
commit the act. Intend means:


Tortfeasor intended the consequences of her act;
or
She knew with substantial certainty that certain
consequences would result.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
3
 ASSAULT
is an intentional, unexcused act
that:
Creates a reasonable apprehension or fear of,
 Immediate harmful or offensive contact.
 NO CONTACT NECESSARY.

 BATTERY



is the completion of the Assault:
Intentional or Unexcused.
Harmful, Offensive or Unwelcome.
Physical Contact.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
4
False Imprisonment is the intentional:



Confinement or restraint.
Of another person’s activities.
Without justification.
Shopkeepers exception: Merchants may
reasonably detain customers if there is
probable cause.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
5
An intentional act that is:


Extreme and outrageous, that
Results in severe emotional distress in another.
Most courts require some physical symptom or
illness.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
6
Right to free speech is constrained by duty
we owe each other to refrain from making
false statements.
 Orally breaching this duty is slander;
breaching it in print or media is libel.

PA 106 -- Kaplan University
7
Trespass to land occurs when a person,
without permission:



Physically enters onto, above or below the
surface of another’s land; or
Causes anything to enter onto the land; or
Remains, or permits anything to remain, on the
land.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
8
 Tortfeasor
does not intend the consequences
of the act or believes they will occur.
 Actor’s conduct merely creates a foreseeable
risk of injury. Analysis:




Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty of care;
Defendant breached that duty;
Plaintiff suffered legal injury;
Defendant’s breach caused the injury.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
9
 Defendant
owes duty to protect Plaintiff
from foreseeable risks that Defendant knew
or should have known about.
 Courts use reasonable person standard (jury)
to determine whether duty exists.
 Duty of Landowners to invitees.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
10
 The
consequences of an act are legally
foreseeable if they are consequences that
typically occur in the course of event.
 Whether an act is foreseeable is generally
considered a matter of fact determined by the
reasonable person standard (jury).
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
11
 Duty
of care varies, based on the Defendant’s
occupation, relationship to Plaintiff.
 Professionals may owe higher duty of care
based on special education, skill or
intelligence. Breach of duty is called
professional malpractice.
 No duty to rescue.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
12
 To
recover, Plaintiff must show legally
recognizable injury.
 Compensatory Damages are designed to
reimburse Plaintiff for actual losses.
 Punitive Damages are designed to punish the
tortfeasor and deter others from wrongdoing.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
13

Even though a Tortfeasor owes a duty of
care and breaches the duty of care, the act
must have caused the Plaintiff’s injuries.


Causation in Fact, and
Proximate Cause.
 Palsgraf
v. Long Island Railroad Co.
(1928).
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
14
 Did
the injury occur because of the
Defendant’s act, or would the injury have
occurred anyway?
 Usually determined by the “but for” test,
i.e., but for the Defendant’s act the injury
would not have occurred.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
15
 An
act is the proximate (or legal) cause of the
injury when the causal connection between the
act and injury is strong enough to impose liability.
 Foreseeability of injury is an important factor.
 Think of proximate cause as an unbroken chain of
events.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
16
 Assumption
of Risk
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
17
Plaintiff has adequate notice and understanding
of the risks associated with an activity.
 He knowingly and willingly engages in the act
anyway.
 Plaintiff, in the eyes of the law, assumes the risk
of injuries that fall within the scope of the risk
understood.

PA 106 -- Kaplan University
18
 Res
Ipsa Loquiter- Latin for "the thing speaks for
itself.“
 It is assumed that a person's injury was caused
by a negligent action of another party because
the accident would not have happened unless
that party was negligent.
 Byrne v Boadle
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
19
 This
is the leading case from 1863 that
established Res Ipsa Loquitor
 Facts: A barrel of flour fell from a secondstory window and hit the plaintiff.
 Who is responsible if the plaintiff could not
prove who breached his duty of care of the
barrels?
 Conclusion: Who cares!
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
20

“I think it would be wrong to lay down as a rule that in no
case can a presumption of negligence arise from the fact
of an accident. Suppose in this case the barrel had rolled
out of the warehouse and fallen on the plaintiff, how could
he possibly ascertain from what cause it occurred? It is the
duty of persons who keep barrels in a warehouse to take
care that they do not roll out, and I think that such a case
would, beyond all doubt, afford prima facie evidence of
negligence. A barrel could not roll out of a warehouse
without some negligence, and to say that a plaintiff who is
injured by it must call witnesses from the warehouse to
prove negligence seems to me preposterous. “
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
21
 What
are “damages?”
 What is the difference between libel and
slander?
 What is the difference between contributory
and comparative negligence?
 What standard is used to determine whether
there has been a breach of duty?
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
22
 What
are punitive damages and when do they
apply?
 What is a supervening act and what effect
does it have?
 What is strict liability and when does it
apply?
 What is negligence per se?
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
23
 For
the transcription assignment, you will
prepare a complaint as if dictated by an
attorney. Drafting a complaint is often a very
challenging task. With practice such as this
assignment, however, you will gain the
confidence to produce polished documents.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
24
 Prior
to completing this assignment, review
Chapter 1, Initiating a Lawsuit, pages 15-38,
from the Legal Transcription textbook. Your
assignment is to draft a formal complaint
according to the audio dictation.
 Check your e-mail and the announcement
board for format suggestions.
PA 106 -- Kaplan University
25