Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
Torts: class 8
Search
kstreseman
September 12, 2018
30
0
Share
Torts: class 8
kstreseman
September 12, 2018
More Decks by kstreseman
See All by kstreseman
Torts: class 22
kstreseman
1
34
Torts: class 21
kstreseman
0
33
Torts: class 20
kstreseman
0
52
Torts: class 19
kstreseman
0
120
Torts: class 18
kstreseman
0
63
Torts: class 17
kstreseman
0
51
Torts: class 16
kstreseman
0
110
Torts: class 15
kstreseman
0
37
Torts: class 14
kstreseman
0
25
Featured
See All Featured
Agile that works and the tools we love
rasmusluckow
331
21k
Six Lessons from altMBA
skipperchong
29
4.2k
Balancing Empowerment & Direction
lara
6
1.1k
Keith and Marios Guide to Fast Websites
keithpitt
413
23k
Tell your own story through comics
letsgokoyo
1
920
Skip the Path - Find Your Career Trail
mkilby
1
120
AI Search: Where Are We & What Can We Do About It?
aleyda
0
7.4k
4 Signs Your Business is Dying
shpigford
187
22k
Beyond borders and beyond the search box: How to win the global "messy middle" with AI-driven SEO
davidcarrasco
3
130
Music & Morning Musume
bryan
47
7.2k
Build your cross-platform service in a week with App Engine
jlugia
234
18k
How To Speak Unicorn (iThemes Webinar)
marktimemedia
1
460
Transcript
CLASS 8 DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS ▸ Overview ▸ Consent
▸ Standard & effect ▸ Limitations ▸ Exceeding the scope ▸ Fraud ▸ Defense of self and others
REVIEW: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS ▸ Act: ∆ engages
in extreme & outrageous conduct ▸ Intent: intended to cause π distress / reckless indifference; i.e., acted even though knew or should have known would cause distress ▸ Causation: that causes π to suffer ▸ Result: severe emotional distress
CONSENT: McQuiggan v. Boy Scouts of America
CONSENT PROBLEMS P. 126
SCOPE OF CONSENT ▸ Koffman v. Garnett ▸ Problems pp.
129-130
DEFEATING THE DEFENSE: CONSENT VITIATED BY FRAUD ▸ Contrasting STD
cases ▸ Hogan v. Tavel ▸ McPherson v. McPherson ▸ Problems pp. 133-134