Trespass
Causing 
1. Intentionally
2. Enters land of another
3. Remains on land or
4. Fails to remove thing
Intrusion under Mistake? (L)
Defense: Private necessity
1. Reasonably appears
necessary
2. To prevent serious harm
3. To actor, land, or chattels, or
third person
4. If advantage > detriment to
possessor
5. But must compensate
Nuisance (3 approaches)
1. Negligence: if benefit greater
than harm, NL
2. Strict Liability: severe,
doesn’t matter how valuable
activity is, must compensate
3. Restatement: unreasonable if
gravity of harm outweighs
utility of conduct. Similar to
B>PL analysis. OR if harm
serious and comp would not
make conduct not feasible (SL
unless SL would drive usage
out of business, in which case
it’s neg)
Defense: coming to nuisance
(consider as factor)
Defamation
1. Minimum negligently
2. False statement
3. Concerning particular person
4. Tends to harm person’s
reputation
5. Published = conveyed
6. Written or Oral
a. If oral: crim offense, STD,
matter incomp w business,
serious sexual misconduct
i. Or if evidence of econ loss
Witnesses in Judicial proceedings:
absolute privilege
Conditional Priv (Defense)
1. Info affects significantly
important interest of 3rd
person
2. Publisher is under legal duty,
or
3. Is a person to whom
publication is within
standards of decent conduct
Rumor: on occasion giving rise to
cond. priv., NL if stated as rumor and
not as fact and relation of
parties/interests/harm make it
reasonable (where interest and harm
are not trivial)
Abuse of Conditional Privilege:
1. Knowledge/recklessness of
falsity
2. Made solely from spite/ill
will (malice)
Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress
1. Extreme and Outrageous
conduct
2. Intentionally or recklessly
3. Causes
4. Severe emotional distress to
another
a. If bodily harm to
other results, liable
for bod harm
5. Except when  sued for
effects of speech
a. And speech is of
public concern
Business Torts
Binding Contracts
1. Intentionally
2. Improperly
3. Interferes with performance
of contract
4. By inducing (ex. request) or
causing person not to
perform
contract/continue/enter
Nonbinding Contracts (2 views)
 CA: NL
 Restatement: balance
motives, interests, liberty
Justifications:
1. Competition
2. Financ. Interest in biz
3. Responsible for welfare of
induced person
4. Influence biz policy in area of
economic interest
5. Honest advice / truthful info
6. Bona fide legal claim
7. Agrmt. illegal/contrary to policy
Alienation of Affects./ Crim Convo
1. Wrongfully
2.
3. To lose affection of spouse
Defense: consent/willing spouse
Privilege: parent/near relative;
 Acts not to appropriate affections,
but to advance what reason
believes to be welfare of spouse.
Disclosure of Embarrassing Facts
1. Gives publicity
2. To matter concerning the
private life of another
3. Highly offensive to reas. pers.
4. Not of legit public concern
Right of Publicity
1. Appropriates
2. Commercial value of identity
3. By using without consent
4. Name, likeness, indicia of ID
5. For purposes of trade
4 Tests:
Rstmt: merch or in connection with
user’s services
Transform: signif. creative elements
Predominate purposes test: if predom
purpose is commercial
1st Amend. Protec.: balance RoP
NEGLIGENCE
1. Duty
 §7: conduct creates rsk of
phys harm
 Prior conduct creates risk
 Special relationship
 Undertakings
 Landowner
2. Breach of Duty (B> P x L)
 Custom:
o Compliance ev of no
breach
o Counter: is this an
intelligent custom?
 Neg. per se
 Res Ipsa Loquitur
o  neg when accident causing
 harm is type of accident
that ordinarily occurs b/c of
neg of a class of actors
which  is relevant
member
3. Cause in Fact
4. Proximate Cause
5. Damages
 Herskovits Formula:
Defenses:
 Express Assumption of Risk
 Primary Assumption of Risk
Unreasonable Product Design
1. At time of sale or distribution
2. Foreseeable risks could have
been avoided
3. At reasonable cost
4. By adopting reasonable
alternative design by seller or
distributor
5. Or pred. in chain of dist.
6. And omission of alt. design
renders product not reas. safe
Failure to Warn
F2W can be failure of RC (generally)
1.  knows of risk
2. knows others unaware
3. warning would be effective
Product defective when:
1. foreseeable risks of harm
2. Could be reduced/avoided by
3. Provision of reas. warnings
4. And the omission renders
product not reas. safe
Allergies: harmful ingredient to which
substantial # allergic
Negligent Infliction of Econ. Loss
Pure econ loss rule: NL
▪ J’Aire Rule (min.): Consider—
▪ Extent to which conduct targeted 
▪ Foreseeability
▪ The degree of certainty of injury
▪ Close connection btwn conduct/inj
▪ The moral blame attch to  conduct
▪ Policy of preventing future harm
NEG + 3RD PTY MISCONDUCT
Distraction:
 Duty for artificial
conditions/conduct on land that
pose a risk of physical harm to
persons or property not on the land.
 Natural conditions (commerc.): RC
duty
 Natural (noncommercial) land: RC
duty if possessor knows risk
Duty to 3rd pers based on sp. Rel.
RC duty to third persons with regard
to risks posed by the other that arise
within the scope of the relationship
Psychotherapists
When therapist determines that his
patient presents a serious danger of
violence to another, he incurs
obligation to use reasonable care to
protect the intended victim against
such danger
Provoking Criminals
Shopkeeper does not have a duty to
comply with the unlawful demand of
an armed robber that property be
surrendered.
STRICT LIABILITY
Animals
 Wild Animals
1. Belongs to category of
animals
2. Not generally domesticated
3. Likely, unless restrained, to
cause phys injury
 Dangerous Animals
1. Dangerous tendencies
abnormal to category
2. Owner has reason to know of
tendencies
 Subject to strict liability
 For Physical Harm
 Caused by Wild Animal
Defense: harm stems from ’s making
contact with/coming into prox to
animal for purpose of securing benefit
Abnormally Dangerous Activities
 Rylands liability (½ jurisdictions):
Liability for uncommon activities of
's land that causes material to go
on 's land
 R3§20 An actor who carries on an
abnormally dangerous activity
subject to SL for phys harm when:
o Activity creates a foreseeable
o and highly significant (P x L)
o Risk of physical harm
o Even when reasonable care is
exercised by all actors; and
o The activity is not one of
common usage
Defense:  makes contact/comes into
prox for purpose of obtaining benefit
Respondeat Superior
Restatement: employer liab for emp
torts when
 performing work assigned by the
employer or engaging in a course
of conduct similar to the
employer’s control. Employee’s act
not within the scope of employm’t
when it occurs within independent
course of conduct not intended by
the empl’e to serve any purpose of
the empl’r.
 Employer is an agent whose
principal controls/ has the right to
control the manner + means of the
agent’s performance of work, and
 The fact that work is performed
gratuitously does not relieve a
principal of liability
CA Approach:
 If motivating emotions fairly
attributable to work-related
events/conditions
 Ex. emp’ment predictably creates
risk that employee will commit int.
torts of type for which L sought OR
 Employee given coercive authority
(police officer)
Manufacturing Defects
Those engaged in sale + distrib. L for:
 At time of sale/distrib.
 Product departs from intended
design despite all possible care.
Food
One engaged in the business of selling
or otherwise distributing food
products who sells or distributes a
food product that is defective is
subject to liability for harm to persons
or property caused by the defect.
Under §2(a), a harm-causing
ingredient of the food product
constitutes a defect if a reasonable
consumer would not expect the food
product to contain that ingredient.