Required Text

Study Aids (not required but helpful):

1. Introduction
   1. Reading Torts Cases and Trial Procedure: pp. 17-24.
2. Fault Based Liability for Phyiscal Harm to Person and Property
   1. Direct Intentional Wrongs:
      1. Establishing a Claim For Intentional Tort To Person or Property:
         1. Battery: pp. 27-35; 35-43.
            1. Requiring fault:
               • Van Camp v. McAfoos, p. 27
            2. Elements of Battery:
               • Snyder v. Turk, p. 30
               • Cohen v. Smith, p. 30
               • Fisher v. Carousel Motor Hotel, pp. 33-34 (n.6)
               • Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communications, Inc. (handout)
               • A.R.B. v. Elkin, p. 34
            3. Re-focusing on Intent:
               • Garratt v. Dailey, p. 35
               • White v. Muniz, p. 37
               • Walker v. Kelly (handout)
               • Palmatier v. Russ (handout)
         2. Assault: pp. 44-48.
            1. Elements of Assault
               • Dickens v. Puryear (handout)
               • Alteiri v. Colasso (handout)
               • Cullison v. Medly, p. 44
         3. False Imprisonment: pp. 48-51
            1. Elements of False Imprisonment
               • McCann v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., p. 48
         4. Torts to Property: pp. 51-59.
            1. Trespass to Land
            2. Conversion of Chattels
            3. Kelly v. LaForce (handout)
            4. Trespass to Chattels
3. Defenses to Intentional Torts - Privileges
   1. Protecting Against the Apparent Misconduct of the Plaintiff: pp. 60-66.
      1. Self-Defense.
      2. Defense of Third Persons.
      3. Arrest and Detention.
         1. Great Atlantic & Pacific Co. v. Paul (handout)
      4. Defense of Property and Recapture of Chattels.
         1. Katko v. Briney, p. 62
         2. Brown v. Martinez, p. 64
   2. The Special Case of Consent, p. 66-73.
      1. Reavis v. Slominski (handout)
      2. Ashcroft v. King, p. 69
      3. Kennedy v. Parrott, p. 70
      4. Doe v. Johnson, p. 71
      5. Problem: Payton v. Donner
   3. Privileges Not Based on the Plaintiff's Conduct, p. 73-78.
      1. Public and Private Necessity
         1. Surrocco v. Creary, p. 74
         2. Wegner v. Milwaukee Ins. Co., p. 75
         3. Ploof v. Putnam, p. 77
         4. Vincent v. Lake Erie, p. 78
4. The Scheme of Negligent Wrongs
   1. The Fault Basis of Liability
   2. Duty
      1. The General Duty of Care: The Due Care or Prudent Person Standard, pp. 83-100
         1. Circumstances External to the Actor
            1. Special Danger:
               • Stewart v. Mott, p. 85
            2. Emergency:
               • Lyons v. Midnight Express (handout)
         2. "Circumstances" in the Actor's own Characteristics
            1. Physical limitations of the actor
               • Shepard v. Gardner, p. 91
               • Roberts v. State of Louisiana (handout)
               • Creasy v. Rusk, p. 92
            2. Special Ability, Knowledge, Experience
               • Hill v. Sparks, p. 95
            3. Infancy
               • Robinson v. Lindsay, p. 97
               • Hudson-Conner v. Putney, p. 98
      2. The General Duty of Care: Specification of Duties - Negligence as a Matter of Law, pp. 100-111
         1. Judicial Treatment of Specific Duties
            1. General duty is specified to a particular requirement of action
               • Marshall v. Southern Ry. Co., p. 100
            2. Specification of general duty rejected and jury role restored
               • Chaffin v. Brame, p. 1oo
         2. Legislative treatment of Specific Duties
            1. Legislative specification accepted as tort standard
               • Martin v. Herzog, p. 100
            2. Legislative specification rejected
               1. By excused violation doctrine
                  • Impson v. Structural Metals, p. 109
               2. By judicial refusal to accept legislative standard
                  • Rudes v. Gottschalk (handout)
         3. Scope of the Per se rule - classes of persons and harms
            • Wright v. Brown (handout)
   3. Breach:
      1. Assessing Reasonable Care by Assessing Risks and Costs, pp. 112-131
         1. Risk/ utility introduced
            • Pipher v. Paisell, p.
            • Indiana Consol. Ins. Co. v. Mathew, p. 117
            • Stinnett v. Buchele, p. 119
            • Bernier v. Boston Edison Co., p. 122
         2. Risk/Utility Balancing
            • United States v. Carroll Towing, p. 127
      2. Proving and Evaluating Conduct, pp. 135-39 (skip pp. 131-34)
         1. Proving Conduct
            1. Direct Proof
               1. Sufficiency of Proof - the requirement of specific conduct
                  • Santiago v. First Student, Inc.
                  • Gift v. Palmer (handout)
               2. Conflicting Evidence - credibility, experts and the process of determining facts
                  • Upchurch v. Rotenberry (handout)
            2. Circumstantial Evidence
               1. Permissible inferences of fact
                  • Forsyth v. Joseph, p. 137
               2. Opinion evidence bearing on factual inferences
                  • Note: Witnesses' opinions as to facts and factual inferences, p.138
         2. Evaluating conduct, pp. 139-47
            1. Evaluation of known conduct
               • Problem: Kibler v. Maddux, p. 139
               • Thoma v. Cracker Barrel, Inc., p. 140
               • Wal-Mart Stores v. Wright, p. 143
            2. Evidence to assist evaluation: custom
               • Duncan v. Corbetta, p. 144
               • McComish v. Desoi (handout)
               • The T.J. Hooper, p. 145
      3. Res Ipsa Loquitur, p. 147
         1. Origins and Basic Features of the Doctrine
            • Byrne v. Boadle, p. 147
            • Valley Properties Limited Partnership v. Steadman's Hardware, Inc. (handout)
            • Eaton v. Eaton (handout)
         2. Attributing fault to the Defendant rather than others
            • Giles v. City of New Haven, p. 156
         3. Is negligence more probable than not
            • Warren v. Jefferies, p. 153
            • Widmyer v. Southeast Skyways, p. 185