TORTS MARCH NOTES
March 10, 1999
When she calls on me say "I think you are totally insane."
Availability of punitive damages:
Intentional torts - yes if desire to harm
Reckless or willful and wanton conduct - yes, ex:
Negligence - no unless reckless (such as drunk driving)
Products liability - yes, if aware of high risk and refuse to take steps to decease danger - Fischer - p. 658 (asbestos)
Reasons for Punitive damage for intentional torts:
Reasons against availability of punitive damages:
survival action: some states allow the decedent's cause of action to survive even after the person dies. The suit must have brought the action BEFORE the person dies. CAN recover punitive damages. CA has this type of statute.
Wrongful death action: if the decedent's estate brings the suit AFTER the person dies, the estate CANNOT recover punitive damages.
Vicarious liability for punitive damages - majority rule: employer may be liable for punitive damages.
Minority (CA) - no punitive damages unless:
products liability - can impose strict liability
possibility of overkill in punitive damages: some awards are too high
--------------------------------------------------
March 15, 1999
Defamation - deals with harm to a person's reputation
There is a common law and modern law section
Public concern
Negligent publication - someone should have foreseen that publishing to a third person would cause someone else to be come aware of it. Can happen by failure of exercise of due care
Defamation's can also be actions - taking someone in handcuffs through a crowded store
Disseminator: held to negligence standard of due care - liable only if know or had reason to know of presence of defamation in product being loaned or sold
Merely associating with a mobster, person in jail - probably not enough for defamation
Accusing someone of being insane - should not cause damage to person's reputation and therefore not defamation;
--------------------------------------
March 17, 1999
Defamation continued
Room 127 7:40 - 8:45 - Monday night next week
Publication to a third party - have to show negligently communicated AND it went to someone other than the plaintiff
If defamatory statement is capable of
At common law damages were presumed. Under modern law P usually has to prove damages. Most likely to be tested on times when damages are not presumed.
General damages - damages which flow from defamation itself (harm to reputation, loss of friends, etc)
CAL CIV CODE
1786.52. Nothing in this chapter shall in any way affect the right
of any consumer to maintain an action against an investigative
consumer reporting agency, a user of an investigative consumer
report, or an informant for invasion of privacy or defamation.
An action to enforce any liability created under this title may be
brought in any appropriate court of competent jurisdiction within
two years from the date on which the liability arises except that
where a defendant has materially and willfully misrepresented any
information required under this title to be disclosed to a consumer
and the information so misrepresented is material to the
establishment of the defendant's liability to the consumer under this
title the action may be brought at any time within two years after
the discovery by the consumer of the misrepresentation.
(a) Any investigative consumer reporting agency or user of
information against whom an action brought pursuant to Section 1681n
or 1681o of Title 15 of the United States Code is pending shall not
be subject to suit for the same act or omission under Section
1786.50.
(b) The entry of a final judgment against the investigative
consumer reporting agency or user of information in an action brought
pursuant to the provisions of Section 1681n or 1681o of Title 15 of
the United States Code shall be a bar to the maintenance of any
action based on the same act or omission which might be brought under
this title.
Libel (letter) - written - something that people see (also can be pictures, braile, feeling a statue)
Slander (spoken) - less permanent, less physical, oral. Nods of head.
Section 46 - of Cal Civ Code
44. Defamation is effected by either of the following:
(a) Libel.
(b) Slander.
45. Libel is a false and unprivileged publication by writing,
printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye,
which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy,
or which causes him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency
to injure him in his occupation.
45a. A libel which is defamatory of the plaintiff without the
necessity of explanatory matter, such as an inducement, innuendo or
other extrinsic fact, is said to be a libel on its face. Defamatory
language not libelous on its face is not actionable unless the
plaintiff alleges and proves that he has suffered special damage as a
proximate result thereof. Special damage is defined in Section 48a
of this code.
46. Slander is a false and unprivileged publication, orally
uttered, and also communications by radio or any mechanical or other
means which:
1. Charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted,
convicted, or punished for crime;
2. Imputes in him the present existence of an infectious,
contagious, or loathsome disease;
3. Tends directly to injure him in respect to his office,
profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him general
disqualification in those respects which the office or other
occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with
reference to his office, profession, trade, or business that has a
natural tendency to lessen its profits;
4. Imputes to him impotence or a want of chastity; or
5. Which, by natural consequence, causes actual damage.
---------------------------------------------------
March 22, 1999
More on defamation
Slander per se categories
retraction statute - gives media a protection
Defenses:
Consent - does not happen very often; analyze the same as intentional torts
Truth - a complete defense under most jurisdictions
Privileges - absolute, qualified
----------------------------------------
March 24, 1999
More on defamation
Defenses
Privileges
Common interest / public interest
Overcome by:
CL malice - split
Lackof honest belief
Split - regarding reasonable belief
Excessive publication
DEFAMATION - Prima facie case:
Damages:
CL DEFENSES
If P is a "public person" (public official or public figure) (v. private individual) defamation is constitutionally privileged (D wins) unless P proves by clear and convincing evidence that D published with "actual malice" (knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth) - New York Times v. Sullivan (p.929) (Butts and Walker, Gertz)
NEED TO KNOW CASE NAME of New York Times v. Sullivan
-------------------------------------------------
March 29, 1999
Constitutional defenses
Acting unreasonably is NOT enough to show "knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth"
Proof for actual malice - clear and convincing proof; more than preponderance of evidence
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. ß KNOW THIS CASE! Page 953
Actual injury damages - with a private P on matter of public concern, states must impose some standard of liability other than strict liability à assume that negligence is the standard for this class
Limited purpose public figure - three requirements
standard of care to show reasonable care under the circumstances - split (for this class use reasonable care under the circumstances test)
factors that lead someone to be a public official and to be a public figure or a private individual - this will tell you what standard of fault needs to be done
public official - someone who holds high governmental office
-----------------------------------------------
March 31, 1999
Types of public figures
Public person
Public figure
If P = private individual reguarding matter of public concern
Concern à gerts applies (negligence for actual; actual malice presumed punitive)
If P = private individual re matters of private concern
presumed and punitive damages don't require actual malice; open issue re negligence or SL
Test for public concern (Durn and Bradstreet v. Greenmoss)
If someone is not a public figure, then they are a private individual:
Private individual with a matter of public concern