Chapter 1 - Nature of LawConstitutions - exist at state and federal levels (2 functions) (trumps all) Set up structure of gov. for political until they control, Separation of powers, Federalism - recognizing the states power of make law in certain areasTo prevent other units of gov. from taking certain actions or passing certain lawsStatutes - laws created by elected reps in Congress or a state legislature -Uniform acts (originally drafted state statutes) - drafted by privates; arent laws until legislature enacts Common Law - law made by judges from cases (tort, contract, and agency) (state level) -Precedents (stare decisis) - judge follow previous judgement; change for public policy & social realm Statutes can supersede common lawStatutory Interpretation 1. Plain meaning of law (stature glossary) 2. Legislative history or goals 3. Legislative purpose Case Law Reasoning - using precedent Equity - produced flexible laws so emphasize general moral views Offer remedies not in common law courts, which only offer money damages or recovery of property Injunction (restrain), Specific performance (perform contract), Reformation (rewrite contract), Rescission (cancel contract)Administrative Regulations and Agency Decisions Administrative regulations appear in precise form in one authoritative source, like statues. Agency decisions - body enacting regulations is not elected agencies have internal courtlike structure (not legally binding)Treaties made by president with foreign govts and approved by 2/3 of US senateOrdinances - the enactments of countries and municipalitiesExecutive Orders power normally comes from legislative delegationPriority Rules: Federal law > state law Constitutions > law in domain and all other state laws Treaty v.s. federal statute over domestic, most recent is more powerful Statues > conflicting laws depending on legislative delegation for validity Statues/any laws derived from delegation > inconsistent common law rulesClassifications of Law- one type of law can be classified in each category Criminal law- the govt prosecutes someone for committing a crime. Civil law- obligations that private parties owe to each other (gov. too) Substantive law- sets rights and duties of people as they act in society Procedural law- controls behavior of govt bodies (courts) Public law- concerns the powers of govt and the relations b/w govt and private parties Private law- framework of legal rules for parties and their dutiesLimits on the Power of Courts Standing to sue requires that the plaintiff have some direct, tangible, and substantial stake in the outcome of the litigation. Declaratory judgment allow parties to determine their rights and duties even though their controversy has not advanced where harm has occurred and legal relief may be necessary

ACTUAL CAUSE: YOU NEED BOTH -but-for test, the defendant would not have been hurt but for the breach of duty. If he wasnt breachin hed be fine. Substantial factor. -Proximate Cause: defendant is liable for only the natural and probable consequences. Of his actions AND/or (due to distance from breach even given actual causation) SCOPE of foreseeable risk-duty element, defendant owes no duty to those who are not foreseeable victims of his actions. -Later Acts, Forces, or Events: IF A LATER ACT is foreseeable, it will not relieve the defendant of liability. INTERVENING CAUSE: LATER ACT THAT AGGRAVATES IS UNFORESEEABLE , most courts hold that it is an intervening cause. Liability is NOT ABSOLVED if there is an intervening cause (unforeseeable event) that produces a foreseeable harm risked by breach of duty. Cannot escape liability if foreseeable consequence came about by unforeseeable means. SPECIAL RULES: Certain cause rules, basic causation. Take their victims as they find them. liABILE for full extent of victims injurieseven if aggravated by preexisting condition or later condition from the case. And neg. medical care. RES IPSA LOQUITUR: Neg. may be difficult to prove because the defendant has superior knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the plaintiffs injury. THE THING SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. 1) defendant has exclusive control of the instrumentality of harm (knowledge and responsibility for the cause are probable, then) 2) the harm that occurred wouldnt normally occur in the absence of neg 3)plaintiff no way responsible for injury. Negligence Defenses: COMMON LAW two defenses to negligence- CONTRIBUTORY negligence ( plaintiffs, failure to exercise reasonable care for his/her own safety pennies on the track) and COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE (PLANTIFFS recovery=defendants percentage share of negligence causing the injury plaintiff proven damages) % of recovery based off of this and assumption of risk PURE= PLAINTIFF GETS WHATEVER THEY GETMIXED=PLAINTTIFF BELOW 50% GETS NOTHING (PLAINTTIFFS voluntary consent to a known danger, SKYDIVING, YOU CHOOSE AND THEN U GET HURT) CHAPTER 1:Substantive law: sets rights and duties of people as they act in societyProcedural law: controls behavior of government bodies (courts) as they establish & enforce substantivePublic law: concerns powers of government and relations between government parties (ex: criminal law)Private law: establishes framework of legal rules that enables parties to set the rights and duties owed to each otherFunctions of Law -peace keeping, checking government power and proclaiming personal freedom, facilitating planning and the realization of reasonable expectations, promoting economic growth through free competition, promoting social justice, protecting the environment Case law reasoning: like cases should be decided alike, precedentStatutory Interpretation: natural ambiguity of language difficulties -plain meaning: what the grammar or definition say -legislative history and legislative purpose: past suggests difference from plain meaning Statute of limitations: after a certain amount of time has passed, cant sue anymore -evidence and testimony deteriorates with time -statute of limitations was 3 years in civil court, exceptions: malpractice, injury from unsafe property

NEGLIGENCE: (1)defendant owed a duty of care to plaintiff 2) that defendant committed a breach of the duty 3) that the breach was the actual and proximate cause of injury experienced by the plaintiff. Plaintiff must prove each element. DUTY: Duty of reasonable carebehave in ways that avoid the creation of unreasonable risks of harm to others. Negligence law=each person must act as a reasonable person of ORDINARY PRUDENCE would have acted under same standards (i.e.-no speeding, juggling guns, etc.)EX:Pete rides a bus to work every day. One day, Dave, the driver of the bus, fails to pay attention while driving, runs a red light, and strikes a large vehicle. Pete suffers a broken arm. Pete would file anegligence lawsuit.First, Pete would have to prove Dave'sduty of care. Since Dave was driving a bus, he was a common carrier. We know that common carriers have a duty to act with a particularly high level of care to keep passengers safe.Second, Pete would have to prove that Davebreached the duty of care. Dave ran a red light and struck a truck because he was not paying attention. That would be a breach of the duty to act reasonably to keep passengers safe. Third, Pete would have to prove that he was harmed. He suffered a broken arm, which certainly counts asdamages. Fourth, Pete would have to prove that the breachcausedthe harm. Pete would not have been injured if Dave had been paying attention. No intervening acts contributed to the injury. So, we can say that the breach caused the harm. 1) Duty of reasonable care-first part of neg. claim. 2)Owed? If plaintiff was among those foreseeably at risk of harm stemming from defendants activities or conduct, OR special relationship (like the cop in the classroom). Duty is usually owed, cases reside largely on breach or direct link of breach and damages. 3) Breached? compares defendant to hypo reasonable person of prudence, focuses on behavior not mental state. FLEXIBILITY-in breach generally resides on 1) reasonable foreseeability of harm-only unreasonable risks. Seriousness or magnitude of forseeable harm, as seriousness of harm increases so does the need to take action to avoid it. Social utility=more valuable, less likely that it will be regarded as a breach of duty. Ease or difficulty of avoiding the risk-superhuman efforts cannot be made to avoid harm. Neg. Law also considers personal characteristics of defendant: children act a certain way, disabled people, etc. Mental deficiencies do not usually count. Context: Emergency or under pressure decision, cant act with as much care naturally. Premises liability cases(persons on property):1. Invitees-invitees are business visitors invited for b purposes (customers, patrons, delivery) and public invitees-held open to pub. Entry must be for purpose tho. 2. Licensees-own purposes, enters with consents. Salespeople, solicitors, etc, shortcut. 3. Tresspassers-no consent and not allowed, trespassers are owed no duty of reasonable care for their safety, only duty to not willfully and wantonly injure trespassers once their presence is known. NEGLIGENCE PER SE: Doctrine, admin regs and statutes to determine how a reasonable person would behave. Violation of this=NPS=breach of duty and plaintiff can win if 1) was within the group of indivs protected by statute or law, 2) suffered harm of a sort the statute was intended to protect against. RELYIN on existing regs-pest control case. 3) linking of harm to breach =CAUSATION OF INJURY: Personal injury: Physical or bodily injury-proven all elements and exp. Injury=comp. medical and pain and suffering. Property damage: Real estate or personal prop like a car, injury.Economic Loss can also be an injury kind of, financial harm, etc. Emotional injury: abandoned impact rule and now allow recovery for forseeable emotional injuries standalone-some still want proof of phys tho. CAUSATION LINK: duty breached, harm done, but No liability without linkage between breach and causation of harm: 1) was the breach actual cause of injury? 2) was the breach proximate cause of injury 3) what was the effect of any intervening cause arising after the breach and helping to cause the injury?

Discovery: You can request more info after the pleadings. Deposition: oral exam of one party of another. Interri: set of qs. RFadmission: yes or no to these facts. Discovery can be mental phys exam-courts can get involved in this. Vids, photo, media requests as well. Summary Judgement: Dispose of clear cases without a trial. Diff from demurrer because it involves factual determinations: For sum judg. 1) no genuine issue of material fact No question about fact 2) entitled to judgment as a matter of law, because of these facts I win. Partial can exist. Directed Verdict: Case away from the jury and provides judgement to one party before jury gets to decide. I.E-we have enough good evidence to let this be decided without a jury there is not much question. Judgement notwithstanding the verdict: even if they against, plz make a final judgement outside of jury. APPEALS generally only look at law errors made by TCs. Affirm, reverse, or remand=go back to trial court for further proceeds if dec. is reversed in whole or part. ADRS: Settlement, Arbitration-submit the dispute to a third party and they give a binding decision (often arbitration clause in contract), court annexed arbitration. Mediation-cooperative resolution through communication. ARBITRATION-arb. Agreement will be valid and irrevocable TORTS: Civil wrong that is not a breach of contract. Intent: desire to cause certain consequences or subs. Certainty that consequences will result from ones behavior. Intent to kill is an ex.Recklessness: Willful and wanton conduct. Concious indifference to a known and substantial risk of harm created by the behavior. You know what you are doing, but not necessarily dead intent to do whatever happens. Aware of risk. Negligence: A failure to use reasonable care, with harm to another party occurring as a result. Protect other against unreasonable risks of harm. You were acting like an idiot, not meaning to do anything direct or without being aware of the harm, but still not taking proper conduct.Strict Liability: Liability without fault, no need to prove intent recklessness, negligence no wrong on defendants part, but they still did it. FAULT IS NOT NEEDED to be proven.Diff from crim law where a fault needs to proven, fault doenst need to be proven. Punitive damages, not losses for victims, but to punish wrongdoers. INTERFERENCE WITH PERSONAL RIGHTS: BATTERY: intentional and harmful(bodily injury) or offensive (calculated to offend a reasonable sense of personal dignity) touching of another without his consent. Does not have to be harmful, can be offensive. Intent for batter=intent to cause harm or intent to cause apprehension that harm or hurt is imminent. **transferred intent: defendant who intents to injure one person but actually injures another is liable to the person injured. Touching does not have to be actual physical touching, it can be a trap/poison or anything attached to body. Plaintiff needent be aware of the battery at the time it occurs (i.e-unconcious). NOT BATTERY if plaintiff consents to touching. Content must be freely and intelligently given to not be battery! Consent CAN be inferred from voluntary participation, but only what would be normal for that situation. Defamation for public figures (known to large parts through own efforts or have placed themselves in forefront of contro): actual maliceknowledge of falsity (had to know they were putting out bs)or reckless disregard for truth (entertained serious doubts, concioulsy rejected evidence of falsity). Knowing false or reckless. Clear and convincing evi, not just preponderance. INVASION OF PRIVACY: Intrusion on solitude or seclusion of another if the intrusion would be HIGHLY offensive to a reasonable individual. Intrusion can be physical=illegal search of home, body, or mail, or nonphys=tapping phone line, bank account, harassing calls. ONLY where reasonable expectation of privacy.Pub disclosure of private facts Publicizing private facts can be IOP-truth is not a defense, publicity here=widespread communication of private details. Types of Pub: False light-if highly offensive to a reasonable person and attributing charactristics and beliefs to a person that he/she does not hold. TRUTH is a defense in false light. Does not have to necessarily be defamed=like some serious thing where all is lost. But widespread, not significant. Commercial appropriation of name or likeness: Defendant commercially uses someones name or likeness, implying endorsement of product or service.DECEIT (FRAUD): Proof of false statement that was knowingly or recklessly made by defendant to induce reliance by plaintiff, determinental justifiable reliance of plaintiff existed too. INTERFERENCE WITH PROP RIGHTS:Trespass: Unauthorized/unprivileged intentional intrusion upon anothers real prop. 1) Physically entering the plaintiffs land, 2) causing another to do so (if u chased someone on there) ACTUAL harm is needed for reckless or negligent trespass. PRIVATE NUISANCE:Usually no phys. Invasion, rather, interference w plaintiff use and enjoyment of land. Odor, noise, smoke, light, vibration. INTEREFERENCE MUST BE:Substantial and unreasonable. Defendant MUST iNTEND the interference. Priv=his or her own land and lot, individualized. Pub=public in general has sustained this nuisance. Gov is party to seek abatement for pub. Nus. CONVERSION: defendants intentional exercise of dominion or control over plaintiffs personal prop without plaintiff consent. 1) acq. Of plaintiff prop (theft, fraud, purchase of stolen prop) 2) removal of plaintiff prop (throw it out, moving car, etc) 3) transfer of plaintiff prop (selling it away) 4) withholding (u cannot have it) 5) destruction or alteration (effed it up in some way) 6) using the plaintiff prop (drivin ur car even tho u didnt say I could)INTENT HERE=intent to exercise control of property-limited to SERIOUS interference. Defendant is liable for the full value of the property.

ASSAULT: INTENTIONAL attempt or offer to cause harmful or offensive contact with another person, if the attempt or offer causes a reasonable apprehension of imminent battery in the other persons mind. INTENT=same as battery. ASSAULT though, does not matter if the threatened contact actually occurred=APPREHENSION is what is most importantattempt causes the fear or anticipation of battery. Appre=only for imminent and immediate. Threats of future battery cannot be liab for assault. Also must be reasonable-no petty stuff.Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: So outrageous in character, so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, atrocious, intolerable. SEVERE emotional distress. Also, defendant must intentionally or RECKLESSLY inflict distress in order to be liable. Reasonable person must experience this distress-i.e. not a crazy person or overly emotional person. At minimum, can charge emotional distress if outrageous behavior relates to family. FALSE IMPRISONMENT: Intentional confinement of another person for an appreciable time(few minutes minimum) WITHOUT consent. Physical or unfounded assertion of legal authority to detain the plaintiff. Threat or harm to a member associated can stop them from moving and also can be FImp. 1)Without consent freely given not in the face of a threat 2) COMPLETE-all exits must be stopped, no way for them to get out of it basically. 3ish) plaintiff must have knowledge of confinement. Shoplifting often a conditional privilege-reasonable cause and manner to suspect and for only a reasonable length of time. Belief that confinement is full isnt the same of full confinement. DEFAMATION: Tort of defamation protects individuals interest in his reputation(1) unprivileged (2) publication of ( communication from one to another counts, an insult is not a pub.)(3) false and defamatory: untrue and harmful to person(4) statements concerning a person (of and concerning: bear upon person who has brought up the case). TWO TYPES: LIBEL- written or printed defamation or other defaming in a physical form. Modern times, radio, television, and internet are libel. Usually without proff of special damage, presumed is okay. SLANDER: oral defamation. Slander per say=presumed damages allowed=usually when statements regarding terrible crime, disease, professionally imcompetent or sex misconduct. BE AWARE-pure opinion is free speech, not defamation, has to be passed off as fact. Group defamation is not really a thing. U cant defame the dead. Corps officers, emps, shholders not defamatory either. One who repeats=also liab. for defamation, publisher, liable too, not distributor. Defamation priv. absolute or conditional, COND: protect or further legit. Interests of another. OR statements made to promote a common interest (intracorp). Fair comment, fair and accurate media reports of gov or pub meetings.

In personam jurisdiction: Residence, location, activities. Base: -citizens or residents of the state(even if situated out of state), within state borders when process is served, or consent to authority to defend. If these dont exist then: (1)Presence-being served with a copy of the summons and complaint while physically present in the forum jurisdiction. The physical presence of a defendant in the forum is a sufficient basis for acquiring jurisdiction over him, no matter how brief his stay might be. (2)Domicile(residence) A person may always be sued for all claims, regardless of where they arise, in their state of permanent residence or in the case of a corporation, the state in which it is incorporated.(3)Consentto personal jurisdiction. A defendant who has not been personally served in the jurisdiction can nevertheless voluntarily appear and submit himself to jurisdiction.Consent can be implied-A state can legislate that a nonresident motorist using its highways be deemed to have appointed a local official as his agent to receive service of process in any action growing out of the use of the vehicle within the state. (4) Minimum Contacts. Having sufficient dealings or affiliations with the forum jurisdiction which make it reasonable to require the defendant to defend a lawsuit brought in the forum state.Hence, a defendant who has never set foot in California may nevertheless be subject to valid personal jurisdiction. Federal Court Jurisdiction: Diversity jurisdiction-when the case is between citizens of different states/citizens vs. foreigngovs and over 75k. Corps=citizens where it is incorporated and where it has principal place of business (nerve center, HQ, control direct and coordinate business activity not necessarily activity based levels). Citizenship proven to be same=cannot be diversity. Different, can be removed. Federal question jurisdiction-no set amount. Arises under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of US. Both Sub-Matter juris. Still need personam. FED can have exclusive which means they have to reside over it or concurrent which means both state and fed have power. If its a federal question in state court, defendant has option to remove.Fed Courts:-Court of Fed. Claims (vs. US), Court of International Trade, Bankruptcy Courts, Tax Courts-decisions can be appealed to FCOappeals. FCOAs: No fact finding, but review legal conclusions. 13 circuit courts. Function of US Court of Appeals=hear appeals from decisions of the fed. District courts. US Supreme Court: Is mainly appellate court. Thus questions of law is what it decides on, not case facts. Certiorari jurisdiction=supreme so we get to hear the case but 1) validity of any treat or fed stat. has been quested, 2) state stat. is challenged as against fed. Law, 3) any title, right, priv, or immunity is claimed under fed law. Original jurisdiction of SC: Trial court-we hear it first. Orig and exclusive (only us): battles between states. Original only: foreign ambassadors, ministers, US v state, aliens. State v. cits of other states. CIVIL PROCEDURE:Adversary system, to win a civil case, plaintiff must prove each element of claim by preponderance of evidence= existence of each factual element is more probable than its nonexistence. You need to prove your version of the facts are true and that your reading/alliance of the law in relation is true. Summons= defendant is being sued, names plaintiff and time of appearance. Copy of plaintiff complaint. Pleadings: Documents the parties file with the court when they first state their respective claims and defenses: Complaint-plaintiffs claim and must state remedy requested. Answer: admission or denial of each part of claim. Affirmative defense=claims are all true but im still right. Counterclaim=new claim, not an attack on pclaims existing, obtain legal loophole. Reply: Plaintiff response to def. Motion to Dismiss: Go away the case is dumb. Can be because of lack of juris. MOST important: dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, demurrer. So what? Cannot recover because no rule of law lets you win on the facts.