Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 435753-ZDdkZ


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability


Defamation False statements that injure a person s reputation or good name. slander spoken defamation libel- written or printed defamation To be defamatory ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:100
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 22
Provided by: KristenFo
Learn more at:


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability

Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict
  • Section 5-2

What Are the Most Common Intentional Torts?
  • Intentional torts are torts in which the
    defendant possessed the intent or purpose to
    inflict the resultant injury.

  • occurs when one person intentionally puts
    another in reasonable fear of an offensive or
    harmful bodily contact

  • Harmful or offensive touching, includes pushing,
  • punching, spitting, or shooting.

False Imprisonment
  • The intentional confinement of a person against
    the persons will and without lawful privilege.
  • It can include being handcuffed or locked in a
    room or car.

  • False statements that injure a persons
    reputation or good name.
  • slanderspoken defamation
  • libel- written or printed defamation
  • To be defamatory the statement must be
  • False
  • Communicated to a 3rd party
  • The victims reputation is ruined or he/she faces

Invasion of Privacy
  • Uninvited intrusion into an individuals personal
  • relationships and activities.

Trespass to Land
  • Entry onto the property of another without the
    owners consent.

  • When property is stolen, destroyed, or used in a
  • manner inconsistent with the owners right.
  • Its criminal counterpart is theft.

Interference with Contractual Relations
  • Encouraging someone to breach a contract.

  • Intentional misrepresentation of an existing
    important fact.

What is Negligence?
  • Negligence is the most common tort!
  • Intent is not required for negligence.
  • Like other torts, it involves the elements of
    duty, breach of duty, causation, and injury.

The Duty in Negligence
  • The general duty imposed by negligence law is the
    reasonable-man standard.
  • reasonable-man standard requires that we act
    with the care and good judgment of a reasonable
    person as not to cause injury to others.
  • Children under the age of 7 are incapable of
  • Professionals and skilled tradespersons are held
    to a higher degree of care in their work.

The Breach of Duty in Negligence
  • The defendants conduct is compared to the
    reasonable-man standard to see if a violation of
    the duty occurred.

Causation and Injury in Negligence
  • The violation of the duty must be the cause of

Defenses to Negligence
  • Contributory negligence defendant may not have
    to pay, his negligence may only have been part of
    the problem (some states)
  • Comparative negligence applies when a plaintiff
    is partially at fault therefore the defendants
    payment will be reduced (most states).
  • Assumption of the risk if plaintiffs are aware
    of the danger, but decide to subject themselves
    to the risk anyway Ex.walking on a wet floor
    when there is a warning sign.

Strict Liability
  • Liability that exists even though the defendant
    was not negligent.
  • Engaging in dangerous activitiesstoring
    flammable liquids.
  • Owning animalshaving a dog bite someone
  • Sale of goods that are dangerous
  • In other words, even if you did not actually do
    something that caused injury, something you own

Whats Your Verdict?
Britt was driving home late one rainy night after
drinking alcohol all evening. With only one
working headlight, she raced down residential
streets at speeds up to 50 miles per hour.
Meanwhile, Yee was slowly backing her station
wagon out of her driveway, but she failed to look
both ways when she should have. Britt rammed
into the right rear end of Yees car. Yees
station wagon was badly damaged, and she was
injured. Can Yee collect from Britt?
  • Britts conduct should be compared to the
    reasonable man standard to determine whether a
    violation of the duty occurred.
  • In this case, a reasonable man would drive at
    safe speed, only when sober, and with both
    headlights working. Britt clearly breached the
    reasonable man standard.
  • Britts speeding was a breach of the duty and it
    is reasonably foreseeable that speeding will
    cause injury.

Whats Your Verdict?
Mrs. Lamm went to a grocery store and placed a
plastic Pepsi bottle into her shopping cart. One
of the bottles exploded and the broken plastic
sliced her leg. Can she collect in tort from the
grocery store or Pepsi Co.?
Mrs. Lamm could collect from either the store or
the bottler under strict liability.