Recent reviews by Nefarian Serpine

This game helped me get through law school.
Intent
Age: absence of intent to injure does not absolve D’s liability if in fact one knew what the outcome of the action could be
Reasonable foreseeable
Mistake: a mistake of identity of a person or animal is not enough to disprove intent
Mentally ill: a mentally ill person may still be held to the standard as long as the mental standard is met
Transfer intent: can be responsible for the results of an act even if it results i nan injury to a person other than the person the act was directed towards

Battery:
Intentionally harmful, or offensive touching of another in a rude, angry, or insolent matter. To someone extension of their body (backpack)

Assault:
The unlawful intention to touch or harm another with the apparent ability to immediately effectuate the attempt
Every battery includes an assault but not every assult includes a battery
The threatened contact must have the ability to be carried out to qualify

IIED
Must be intentional or reckless
Must be extreme or outrageous (being simply rude is not enough)
Causal connection
Must cause a severe disabling

False imprisonment
Must restrict someone's ability to move, against their will(consciousness of confinement), with no reasonable means of escape, counts twords false arrest
(no physical force is needed but physical restraint is needed

Tresspass to land: interfering with a landowner’s right to exclusively own their land
Liable for interfering with landowner’s right to peaceful use and enjoyment of their land
Failure to removed oneself after a license has expired or privilege has been revoked
Tresspass requires actual and substantial damages

Tresspass to chattel
Impairs the quality or value of another’s chattel
Deprives the owner of use of the chattel for a substantial time or
Causes bodily harm to the owner or someone the owner has a legally protected interest

Conversion
Using another’s property as one’s own, while depriving the true owner the ability to use the property

Privileges

Consent
Conduct: if conduct indicates consent
Social nature of the activity: playing football
Medical procedures: cannot be done without consent unless it is neccissary to save their life or doctor discovers dangerous condition while performing operation
Informed: consent must be informed and is not binding if it is induced by fraud/ misrepresentation
Exceptions to consent
Duress
Fraud
Exceeding scope of consent (medical)
Incapacity (ear case)
Illegal

Self-Defense (must be done proportional and reasonable
Retaliation: when battery is no longer threatened privilege terminates
Retreat: one should retreat when it is safe to do so
3rd party: can be liable if in self-defense you harm a 3rd party

Defense of others (as long as the defense is necessary and force is reasonable)

Defense of property (unless the trespasser is committing a violent felony or endagering human life cannot willfully injur trespassor)
Cannot be nondiscriminatory (human life is worth more than property)

Recovery of property: shopkeeper’s privilege
The belief is reasonable that the customer shoplifted
The detention is reasonable under the circumstances
The individual is either still in the store or in the immediate vicinity

Necessity
Private property - in order to commit a tort if it is for the greater good of society or the public (cannot damage private property unless it is for public necessity)
Privilege of necessity exist if
Necessity is clearly shown
Action is made in the interest of countless others
Action is reasonable
Belief is reasonable

Authority of law


Discipline
Parents and teachers can discipline students (this has been pulled back recently

Justification (bus driver had a duty to protect his property and the other passengers

Negligence
Duty
Reasonable foreseeable
Attractive nuisance doctrine
Safe operation: failure to prevent the foresseable actions of a passenger taht interfere with the safe operation of a motor vehicle
What a RPP do under the same/similar circumstances (emergency doctrine)
The professional
What would an average professional in that field do?
Bad result does not automatically = bad pratice
Not liable when acting in good faith and makes an honest mistake
Must have expert testimony to convict
Informed consent (you must disclose all risks to patient unless
Disclosure would alarm an emotionally upset patient
Emergency situation and patient cannot determine his proper treatment
Common knowledge
Handicap doctrine
Child doctrine (what a child of similar age and intelligence would do (unless child is engaging in adult activites))
Insanity doctire (mental disability doesn’t lower standard
In medical mal practice the patient must prove
D physician failed to adequately inform P of material risk of harm
If P had been informed of risks that P would not have consented
The adverse conditions not made know to P actually caused injury
Discovedy rule: the clock begins to tick when the patient realizes malpractice has occured
Peronal interest: must also disclose a DR personal interest in the case
Breach
Causation
Cause in fact (but for) (sine qua non) (ask other about the train one)

Proof of causation: plaintiff must produce evidence of D’s negligence
Cannot recover for an injury if mere possibility that the injury was caused by another’s negligence (ex contracted canfer 3 years after cutting head)
2 Establish causation
Frye test: acceptable evidence is based on general acceptance in the scientific community
Daubert test: requires expert scientific testimony that is reliable and relevant
Expert testimony: cannot offer evidence that is not generally accepted unless proof of causation is more likely than no to have caused injury
3. Concurrent cause (more than 1 cause of injury)
Liable if negligence was material or substantial element in causing damage
Not liable if such conditions were present that would have caused damage regardless of the negligence of the D
Unkown party causing harm: two person who independently act negligently are both held liable unless D assumes the burden of proof and shows his innocence
When the exact party causing the harm is not identifiable a company is liable to P based upon the correlation between market share of that product and the subsequent liability
Proximate cause (can’t have without proximate cause)
Unforeseeable consequences: remoteness in 1 distance or 2 time
Foreseeability is gauged from D’s perspective. iD is liable for the proximate results of his own actionsnot for remote damages
In re polemis: nature of the activity/ conduct which arises the foreseeability that harm could happen
Does the link break or is there a direct causal connection between the two
2. Intervening causes: intervening acts of a 3rd party does not automatically sever liability between the plaintiff and the defendant. (if the intervening act is a normal or foreseeable consequence of the circumstance created by D’s negligence (suicide))
3. Public policy:
Social host liability: host will be liable for guest if injury/ accident foreseeable
Bulti genrational: will not be liable for grandparent to current child liability

Joint tortfeasors

harm


Rule of law

Viloalation of statute (negligence per se)(violation of a statue is NPS)
Applicability of statute
P must belong to the class of people that statute intends to protect
P’s injury must be the type the statue was designed to prevent
Defendant’s conduct falls short of the statue

Proof of negligence
Circumstantial evidence
Bannan peel cases (notice of the dangerous conditions and opportunity to remove the dangerous conditions)
Foreseeability

Res Ipsa loquitur (last defense)
Exclusive control
Unkown elements

Not as good at battles as total war
Not as good at RPG/ Grand Strategy as CK
Not that good

3k h would say good

Rock solid

KOTOR remastered ++++++++++++++++