Torts

This lesson deals with the respective roles of judge and jury in deciding a torts case. It considers the procedural devices used (primarily by defendants) in an attempt to keep the case away from the jury and to provide the basis for an appeal.

The traditional division of negligence into duty, breach of duty, causation (cause in fact and proximate cause), and damages provides the structure of this lesson. The student will find navigation to an individual section or even to an individual area (such as res ipsa loquitur within breach of duty) easy. The most likely use of the lesson is as a review and test of understanding following classroom discussion, but the questions can also be used to preview that discussion.

This is an exercise requiring the student to apply the concept of intent, as defined in Restatement (Second) of Torts. The student is asked (1) to approve or disapprove asserted propositions applying the concept to a fact situation; (2) to identify the errors in erroneous propositions; (3) to indicate how erroneous propositions can be corrected; and (4) to identify, in the role of associate counsel at trial, appropriate grounds of objection to a proposed charge to the jury.

Battery Basics is an introduction and initial exploration of the intentional tort of battery. It is designed primarily for students who want to test their basic knowledge of the tort, or who spent little or no time on intentional torts in class. Battery Basics identifies the elements of battery, requires application to some common fact situations, and responds to common misconceptions about the tort.

Battery Puzzlers is one of two lessons available from CALI on the intentional tort of battery. The other lesson, Battery Basics, is designed for students who will spend little time on battery in their classes or are uncomfortable with their understanding of the tort. It is designed to provide a solid understanding of battery.

This lesson identifies the law of the intentional tort of assault, and challenges the student to apply unusual fact situations to that law. The exercise explores the tort of assault as it has developed to cover modern settings.

This lesson explores an intentional tort that is one of the most recent torts to emerge, one of the most commonly pleaded today, and one that is still evolving. The tort is most commonly called intentional infliction of mental distress; sometimes courts call it intentional infliction of emotional distress, or simply outrage.

This lesson explores the intentional tort of false imprisonment. Beginning with identification of the interest the tort protects, the questions become more and more challenging as they explore the nature of the confinement necessary and appropriate damages. Since the greatest use of the tort today probably is in arrest for shoplifting, the lesson includes a tightly fact-bound question about a person detained for shoplifting. The lesson concludes with false imprisonment in two tough situations: religious deprogramming and nursing home confinement.

This interactive exercise addresses the topic of consent as a privilege or defense to various intentional tort claims. It begins with a consideration of how consent is determined to exist and then explores various applications of the defense in contexts such as medical encounters and sporting events. Consideration is given to how the courts have utilized the concept of consent in balancing the competing interests of the plaintiff and the defendant in relation to overarching policy goals.