Torts

This lesson deals with basic principles and measures of damages recoverable for harms to real property. The analysis to which students will be acquainted examines the harms in the context of three categories of interests to be protected by the law of damages. Those categories, which are separately treated in the lesson, are exclusive possession, physical integrity and use and enjoyment.

This lesson is an exploration of the law of torts enabling a person to obtain compensation for wrongful interference with personal property. The exploration uses the concepts of interests, invasion, conduct and remedy as the vehicles for developing understanding of the cause of action and its operation. Each section of the lesson will focus on one of these components, present the theory, and then give the student an opportunity to apply the theory or explore some of its ramifications.

This lesson explores the cause of action of conversion as a means of compensation for intentional interferences with personal property. It will examine the several components of interest, invasion, conduct and remedy as the conceptual vehicles for study. Each section of the lesson will focus on one of these components, present the theory, and then give the student an opportunity to apply the theory or explore some of its ramifications.

This lesson contains problems and questions concerning the Reasonable Person standard for negligence actions. The central issue in negligence is the duty of care. For the typical adult, the standard is the Reasonable Person of Ordinary Prudence under similar circumstances.

This lesson covers the traditional negligence standard of care for children. It, of course, deals with the exceptional circumstances of when the adult standard applies to children. In addition, the lesson covers other diminished capacity examples, such as mental illness, physical disability, and intoxication.

This lessons discusses the standard of care of professionals. The initial sections illustrate the general duty of professionals and highlight special problems associated with the professional standard. Special attention is then directed toward the malpractice action against attorneys.

This lesson covers the area traditionally known as "negligence per se." The problem of when can a civil or criminal statute be used as the standard of care in negligence cases is the primary matter discussed. The lesson gives some special attention to the "Dram Shop" example.

This exercise begins by illustrating the distinction between cause in fact and legal or proximate cause and then utilizes questions intended to familiarize the student with the but for or sine qua non test and the substantial factor test. The exercise also covers issues relating to concurrent cause dilemmas and problems in identifying which harm was caused to the plaintiff by multiple negligent defendants.

This exercise builds upon the tutorial entitled Causation in Fact and that lesson should be completed prior to this exercise. In this exercise, the evidentiary burdens of proof are considered in relation to the use of direct and circumstantial evidence and the use of expert testimony. The exercises illuminate issues surrounding problems of proving who or what caused the plaintiff's harm. Burden shifting devices employed by courts in special situations are also considered.

This lesson deals with the question of when and why an event that intervenes between the defendant's negligence and the plaintiff's injury may have the result that the defendant is relieved of liability for the injury.

Even though the thing speaks for itself, this lesson speaks more about res ipsa loquitur. This tort doctrine becomes an immediate favorite of all who hear its mellifluous name, but the doctrine has several nuances that do not speak so clearly, such as the circumstances when it applies, how common carriers are covered, and how it is conveyed to the jury. This lesson explores all of those nuances.