Torts

Class Notes

Case Briefs

  1. Hammontree v. Jenner: 9/2/08 ; the standard of negligence vs. absolute liability.
  2. Chriatiansen v. Swensen: 9/4/08 ; vicarious liability, respondeat superior, and the Birkner test
  3. Roessler v. Nowak: 9/4/08 ; does apparent agency count as an employer-employee relationship for vicarious liability?
  4. Brown v. Kendall: 9/4/08 ; gets rid of the distinction between trespass and trespass-on-the-case; requirement of due care
  5. Adams v. Bullock: 9/4/08 ; the standard of care: ordinary care does not require foreseeing extraordinary perils
  6. United States v. Carroll Towing Co.: 9/9/08 ; The Hand formula for damages
  7. Bethel v. New York City Transit Authority: 9/9/08 ; the duty of highest care on public transport
  8. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Co. v. Goodman: 9/11/08 ; role of the court in defining what the standard of care
  9. Pakora v. Wabash Railway Co.: 9/11/08 ; the results of Goodman shouldn't be blindly followed without sensitivity to particular facts.
  10. Andrews v. United Airlines Inc.: 9/11/08 ; Erring on the side of giving cases to the jury.
  11. Trimarco v. Klein: 9/11/08 ; The importance of custom in determining liability, and whether the jury should be the one to decide it.
  12. Martin v. Herzog: 9/11/08 ; Violation of statute is negligence per se, absent satisfactory excuse.
  13. Tedla v.Ellman: 9/11/08 ; circumstances under which a statute might not be applicable.
  14. Negri v. Stop and Shop Inc.: 9/16/08 ; it's possible to pursue a suit without direct evidence ("constructive notice")
  15. Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History: 9/16/08 ; constructive notice again
  16. Byrne v. Boadle: 9/16/08 ; origin of res ipsa loquitur
  17. McDougald v. Perry: 9/16/08 ; res ipsa loquitur when evidence is unavailable; specification of the elements
  18. Ybarra v. Spangard: 9/16/08 ; res ipsa even when a specific defendant can't be identified because the plaintiff was anaesthetized.
  19. Sheely v. Memorial Hospital: 9/18/08 ; standards for admissibility of expert testimony in medical malpractice suits
  20. States v. Lourdes Hospital: 9/18/08 ; relationship between expert testimony and res ipsa
  21. Matthies v. Mastromonaco: 9/18/08 ; the standard for informed consent claims against doctors
  22. Harper v. Herman: 9/18/08 ; a social host does not have an affirmative duty to warn of all dangers
  23. Farwell v. Keaton: 9/18/08 ; attempting aid gives rise to the duty to act as a reasonable person
  24. Randi W. v. Muroc Joint Unified School District: 9/23/08 ; Liability for letters of recommendation.
  25. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California: 9/23/08 ; psychiatrist's duty to warn if there is foreseeable harm to an identifiable third party
  26. Uhr v. East Greenbush School District: 9/25/08 ; conditions under which a statute can create a private right of action
  27. Strauss v. Belle Realty Co.: 9/25/08 ; public policy mandates the limitation of liability in some cases
  28. Reynolds v. Hicks: 9/25/08 ; social hosts not liable to third parties for injuries caused by drunken minors
  29. Vince v. Wilson: 9/25/08 ; Negligent entrustment
  30. Carter v. Kinney: 9/30/08 ; Duties to licensees vs. invitees
  31. Heins v. Webster County: 9/30/08 ; the invitee/licensee distinction leads to absurd results and should be abandoned
  32. Posecai v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.: 9/30/08 ; tests for business liability for patrons' safety from crime
  33. Broadbent v. Broadbent: 10/2/08 ; parental immunity
  34. Riss v. City of New York: 10/2/08 ; essentially no municipal immunity with respect to police services
  35. Lauer v. City of New York: 10/7/08 ; ministerial vs. discretionary acts
  36. Friedman v. State of New York: 10/7/08 ; qualified liability where injuries arise from arbitrary or irrational decisions
  37. Cope v. Scott: 10/7/08 ; relationship between policy and discretion in federal tort claims: economic, social, and political considerations are immune
  38. Falzone v. Busch: 10/7/08 ; emotional
  39. Metro North Commuter Railroad Company v. Buckley: 10/9/08 ; difference between immediate terror and distress over long-term exposure to asbestos
  40. Gammon v. Osteopathic Hospital of Maine Inc: 10/9/08 ; non-fear-based emotional distress
  41. Portee v. Jaffee: 10/9/08 ; elements required for recovery by bystanders experiencing emotional distress
  42. Johnson v. Jamaica Hospital: 10/9/08 ; a nice combination of elements that brings in a number of themes from previous cases
  43. Nycal Corporation v. KPMG Peat Marwick LLP: 10/14/08 ; economic harm is recoverable if the victim had an identifiable reliance relationship (near privity) with the negligent party.
  44. 532 Madison Avenue Gourmet Foods Inc. v. Finlandia Center Inc.: 10/14/08 ; no recovery for people who suffer economic harm if there's no direct relationship-- like Strauss v. Belle Realty but not with personal injury.
  45. Emerson v. Magendantz: 10/14/08 ; "limited recovery" for wrongful birth
  46. Stubbs v. City of Rochester: 12/21/08 ; causation needs to be shown to a "reasonable degree of certainty" in order to justify having a trial
  47. Zuchowicz v. United States: 12/21/08 ; if negligence increased the probability of the harm that occurred, we can infer a causal relationship, absent a rebuttal from the defendant
  48. Alberts v. Schultz: 10/21/08 ; lost chance recovery, and the need to show causation (i.e., that negligence caused a reduction in chance)
  49. Summers v. Tice: 10/23/08 ; alternative liability.
  50. Hymowitz v. Eli Lilly and Co.: 10/23/08 ; toxic tort with market share recovery
  51. Benn v. Thomas: 10/28/08 ; Eggshell plaintiff rule; unexpected degree of harm
  52. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness Withy and Co. Ltd.: 10/28/08 ; liability for unexpected type of harm
  53. Overseas Tankship UK Ltd. v. Morts Dock and Engineering Co. Ltd. The Wagon Mound: 10/28/08 ; limiting liability only to foreseeable consequences of actions
  54. Doe v. Manheimer: 10/28/08 ; superseding causes: relationship between the type of harm and the nature of the negligence
  55. Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.: 10/30/08 ; duty and remoteness of causation
  56. Fritts v. McKinne: 11/6/08 ; the fact that a patient ends up seeing a doctor due to negligence doesn't excuse physician negligence
  57. Dalury v. S-K-I Ltd.: 11/6/08 ; exculpatory clauses are suspect
  58. Murphy v. Steeplechase Amusement Co.: 11/10/08 ; volenti non fit injuria: if the dangers of an activity are obvious and necessary, and voluntarily accepted, risk is assumed
  59. Davenport v. Cotton Hope Plantation Horizontal Property Regime: 11/11/08 ; SMRY
  60. Levandoski v. Cone: 11/11/08 ; fireman rule
  61. Geier v. American Honda Motor Company Inc.: Read but not required; federal statutes can pre-empt state standards.
  62. Fletcher v. Rylands: 11/13/08 ; Strict liability for mischief due to release of hazardous things
  63. Rylands v. Fletcher: 11/13/08 ; Pretty much just an affirmation of strict liability
  64. Sullivan v. Dunham: 11/13/08 ; Strict liability in action in the US
  65. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. v. American Cyanamid Co.: 11/13/08 ; no place for strict liability when due care could have prevented the harm
  66. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.: DATE ; SMRY
  67. Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. of Fresno: DATE ; SMRY
  68. Soule v. General Motors Corporation: DATE ; SMRY
  69. Camacho v. Honda Motors Co. Ltd.: DATE ; SMRY
  70. Hood v. Ryobi America Corp.: DATE ; SMRY
  71. Edwards v. Basel Pharmaceuticals: DATE ; SMRY
  72. Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation: DATE ; SMRY
  73. General Motors Corporation v. Sanchez: DATE ; SMRY
  74. Seffert v. Los Angeles Transit Lines: DATE ; SMRY
  75. McDougald v. Garber: DATE ; SMRY
  76. Arambula v. Wells: DATE ; SMRY
  77. Taylor v. Superior Court: DATE ; SMRY
  78. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell: DATE ; SMRY