Bell-work 1/27/17 Read one of the two quotes under World Government and give a brief meaning.

Bell-work 1/31/17 Provide one example of an intentional tort and explain why it is an intentional tort. You may need your notes from last week.

Negligence

Elements of Negligence The defendant, or wrongdoer, owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, or injured person. That duty was violated, or breached, by the defendant's conduct. The defendant's conduct caused the plaintiff's harm. The plaintiff suffered actual damages.

Duty and Breach Everyone has a duty to act reasonably toward others If a person fails to act reasonably and causes harm they may be liable for damages. "Reasonable person of ordinary prudence or carefulness. Idealized person not actual Reasonable person considers: likeliness of harm seriousness of harm burden of avoiding the harm reasonable person does not break the law breaking the law is an automatic BOD Professionals have duty specific to their profession Minors DOC age, experience, and intelligence, except adult activities

Abbreviations DOC = Duty of Care BOD = Breach of Duty

Causation Plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s action or inaction caused the harm to the plaintiff. Two types of cause (must prove both) Cause in fact – without the wrongful act the damage could not have occurred. Proximate cause – harm was a foreseeable result of the action.

Damages Must prove actual damages Plaintiff would be restored (theoretically) to preinjury condition through the use of money Must show economical harm before being granted noneconomic harm.

Defenses to Negligence Contributory Negligence – plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to harm received, need only be small Comparative Negligence – plaintiff’s own negligence contributes, but the damages are reduced in accordance with how at fault each party is to the harm. Also occurs with more than one defendant. Counterclaim – occurs when the defendant files a claim against the plaintiff after the plaintiff has filed the initial claim. Assumption of Risk - when the plaintiff is aware of the danger and accepts the risk. (sky-diving)

Strict Liability Defendant is liable to the plaintiff regardless of fault Storing and transporting dangerous substances Blasting (demolition) Manufacture and sale of defective products Harm caused by dangerous animals Strict Liability only requires proving causation and damages.

Application Unreasonably dangerous – involve a risk of harm that cannot be eliminated even by reasonable care. Duty holder assumes liability for all foreseeable risk. Includes an off-branch called Toxic Torts, which includes industrial waste dump. Strict liability applies to untamed animals, such as tigers. Owners of domesticated pets are only strictly liable when they knew or should have known the animal was vicious. An exception occurs in public places, where the owner had a duty to keep the pet under control. Product liability Certain unsafe products may not hold strict liability when the benefits outweigh the dangers involved in manufacturing the product.

Defenses to Strict Liability Argue that the plaintiff needs to prove negligence and public policy does not require the use of strict liability for the tort. Defendant can show either no causation or no damages. Consumer misuse of product or failure to mind safety warnings.