Sample Questions #4

1. In 1991, Roy Martin and his wife, Alice; their son, Hiram; and Hiram’s wife, Myrna, acquired title to a 240 acre farm.  The deed ran to Roy Martin and Alice Martin, the father and mother, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, and to Hiram Martin and Myrna Martin, the son and his wife, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship.  Alice Martin died in 1996, Roy Martin married Agnes Martin.  By his will Roy Martin bequeathed and devised his entire estate to Agnes Martin.  When Roy Martin died in 2001, Hiram and Myrna Martin assumed complete control of the farm.  State the interest in the farm, if any, of Agnes, Hiram, and Myrna Martin on the death of Roy Martin. Please discuss.

 2. In her will, Teressa granted a life estate to Amos in certain real estate with the remainder to Brenda and Clive in joint tenancy.  All the rest of Teressa’s estate was left to Hillman College.  While going to Teressa’s funeral, the car in which Amos, Brenda, and Clive were driving was wrecked.  Brenda was killed, Clive died a few minutes later, and Amos died on his way to the hospital.  Who is entitled to the real estate in question?  Please discuss.

3. At the time of his marriage to Ann, Robert owned several parcels of real estate in joint tenancy with his brother, Sam.  During his marriage, Robert purchased a house and put the title in his name and his wife’s name as joint tenants, not as tenants in common.  Robert died; within a month of his death, Smith obtained a judgment against Robert’s estate.  What are the relative rights of Sam, Smith and Ann?  Please discuss.

ANSWERS:

Question 1. 

The crucial point in answering this question is to decide whether a single joint tenancy which included all four people or a joint tenancy involving the mother and father and a second joint tenancy involving the son and his wife were created.  

The description of the joint tenancy gives us the answer:  to Roy Martin and Alice Martin, the father and mother, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, and to Hiram Martin and Myrna Martin, the son and his wife, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship.

The language specifically describes a joint tenancy involving Roy and Alice and a second joint tenancy involving Hiram and Myrna. 

When Alice Martin died, Roy Martin inherited her share of the property that he held in joint tenancy with her.  He now owned an undivided half of the property by himself.  His son and his wife owned the other half as joint tenants.  When Roy died, he had the right to pass onto to Agnes, his interest in the property.  Agnes now owns half of the property.

Question 2. 

The key to answering this question is to analyze the estate and future interest that Teresa created. 

The facts tell us that Teresa gave a life estate to Amos with the remainder to Brenda and Clive as joint tenants. 

The remainder is a vested remainder since we know that Brenda and Clive were given the  future interest,  no one else may be included in the class with them, and there are no conditions.  The remainder was given to Brenda and Clive in joint tenancy.  Since this is a vested remainder, the property will not go back to Teresa.  This should tell us that the property will be inherited by Brenda or Clive or Brenda and Clive or their heirs. 

When Brenda died, Clive inherited all of her interest in the real property (because he and Brenda owned the property as joint tenants).  At this point, the conveyance of the property from Teresa became:   A life estate to Amos with the remainder to Clive. 

When Clive died, the conveyance now became:  A life estate to Amos with the remainder to Clive’s estate. 

When Amos died, the property will now be distributed to Clive’s heirs.

Several students mentioned the simultaneous death act in their answers.  This is a law or legal concept which is used when joint tenancy holders die at the same time or nearly at the same time and it is difficult to determine who died first.  As was shown in this particular homework assignment, the order in which Brenda and Clive died made a huge difference in who would ultimately receive the estate. 

In cases where it is not clear which joint tenancy holder died first, the simultaneous death act assumes that both died at the same time.  In the homework assignment, it was clearly stated that Brenda died first and then Clive died.

Question 3. 

Robert owned property with his brother Sam as joint tenants.  He also owned property with his wife Ann as joint tenants.  Upon Robert’s death, Sam became the sole owner of the property he previously owned with Robert.  Ann also became the sole owner of the property she previously owned with Robert. 

As for Smith, he was Robert’s creditor, but he did not become a creditor until after Robert’s death and after the properties Robert held in joint tenancy with his brother and his wife had already been consolidated.  As a result, the properties currently held solely by Sam and Ann are beyond Smith’s reach.  

Sample Quiz #2

1. True/False: Brad saw his classmate Joan sleeping outside the class and kissed her. Brad is guilty of
battery.

True. Battery is the crime and tort of unpermitted touching. Since Brad kissed Joan without securing
her permission, battery was committed. Although the fact situation does not indicate this, if there were
a close relationship between the two so that permission to kiss was implied by this relationship, battery
would not have been committed.


2. True/False: The same act can be both a tort and a criminal violation.

True. Question #1 is a good example. Battery can be both a tort and a criminal law violation.


3. Bill was walking by the ocean when he heard a drowning man cry out for help. Bill is legally required
to help if/because:

a. Bill is able to do so.
b. It is the right thing to do.
c. Bill has started to help the person.
d. All of the above.
e. Two of the above.

Answer (c) is correct. Unless a relationship exists between Bill and the drowning man that would create
a legal duty to act, Bill is under no obligation to help, but once he starts to rescue the person, he is
legally obligated to continue.


4. True/False: A true statement of a highly personal nature made to embarrass someone could be
defamation of character.

False. The statement must be false in order for the tort of defamation of character to be committed.


5. True/False: Tim and his friend are playing catch in the backyard when Tim threw the ball over the
fence into the neighbor’s yard where it breaks a window. This is trespass to real property even if Tim
himself does not go onto the property to get the ball

True. Trespass is committed when a person enters or throws something onto the property of another
without permission.

6. True/False: The tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress will protect someone from abusive
language.

False. In order for this tort to be committed, the behavior must be truly outrageous.  7. Individuals may use reasonable force to protect themselves, others, and their property. Identify the
accurate statements:

a. Use of deadly force is reasonable to protect property.
b. Deadly force is never reasonable to protect property.
c. Use of deadly force is reasonable if an attack threatens the victim with the immediate use of deadly
force.
d. (a) and (c)
e. (b) and (c)

Answer (a) is not correct. Deadly force cannot be used to protect property. For this reason, answer (b)
is true. Answer (c) is also true. If a person is in immediate fear of someone using deadly force upon him
or her, he or she may use deadly force in his or her defense. Answer (e) is the correct answer.


8. The doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur would permit the court to infer negligence in which of the following
situations:

a. A bus hits your car.
b. A ladder collapses on your foot.
c. A light bulb explodes and cuts your eyes while picking up the bulb.
d. A can of peas fell off the shelf and hits your foot.

Answers (a,b,d) are not correct because these accidents could result from negligent or non-negligent
causes. Answer (c) is correct. A light bulb should not explode just because it was being picked up
unless there was some negligence involved.


9. Which of the following can be raised as a defense to a claim of defamation?

a. That the statement that was made was true.
b. That there was a constitutional privilege to comment about the plaintiff and that the statement was
made without malice.
c. That there was a conditional privilege to comment on the matter alleged to be defamatory.
d. All of the above.
e. Two of the above.

The correct answer is all of the above. 


 10. True/False. Sam goes to the movies one Friday evening. The movie is boring and Sam falls asleep.
At 2 am, the security guard locks the building. Sam awakens the next morning when the cleaning crew
opens the door. Sam can sue for false imprisonment.

False. There was no intent to detain Sam unlawfully.

 11. In an article about the death of a prominent judge, a newspaper indicated the possibility that the
judge may have had Mafia connections. The judge’s family sues. The family:

a. Will likely win if the suit is for defamation.
b. Will likely win an intrusion suit
c. Will likely win a public disclosure of private facts suit.
d. Will likely lose.

Answer (a) is incorrect because a dead person cannot sue for defamation of character. Answer (b) is
incorrect because the fact situation does not indicate that an invasion of privacy took place. Answer (c)
is incorrect because the fact situation does not indicate any unauthorized disclosure of a private fact.
Answer (d) is correct. 


12. A tort violation may be committed:
a. Intentionally
b. Negligently
c, Without fault
d. In all of the above ways.
e. Two of the above.

The correct answer is (d). In all of the above ways.


13. True/False: A private citizen, sees B and C bending over a dead person, D. B and C accuse each
other of murdering D. A is not sure who killed D, but he has a reasonable suspicion that either B or C did
it. If A arrests B, A will be liable if it turns out C was the murderer.

False. In this situation, it is reasonable to assume that either B or C or both committed the murder.
Since this assumption is reasonable, A would not be liable if B did not commit the act.


14. True/False: Jack sold his home in San Francisco to Lauren with closing in 20 days. The house was
totally destroyed on day 8. At the time for closing, Lauren must purchase the property because she
signed a contract to buy

False. In California, the normal rule does not apply. The buyer need not purchase the property unless
the seller permitted the buyer to be on the property prior to Closing.


15. True/False: John gave his land to Mary for life as long as she remains unmarried, but if she marries,
the property will go to Gil. Gil has a remainder because the property goes to a third party rather than
back to the grantor.

False. Gill has an executory interest. This is because the prior estate (Mary’s life estate) does not come
to a natural end.

 16. Bob and his sister, Claudia, can own property by:

a. Tenancy in common
b. Joint tenancy.
c. Any of the above.

The correct answer is (c).


17. True/False: Every purchaser of real property should purchase title insurance because it guarantees
rightful ownership.

False. Title insurance will give to the buyer the purchase price if it turns out the seller did not have the
right to sell the property. It does not guarantee ownership.


18. True/False: In an easement In Gross, the easement will benefit a non-land owner.

True. The easement is held by a person, not attached to a property.


19. When a contract involving a sale of real estate calls for the delivery of the deed in return for the
purchase price on a certain day, this performance is known as:

a. Foreclosure.
b. Warranty deed day.
c. Contract day.
d. Closing.

The correct answer is (d), closing.


20. Adverse possession:

 a. Is an involuntary transfer of title.
 b. Is an illegal transfer of title.
 c. Allows a person a chance to retrieve their mortgage.
 d. None of the above.

The correct answer is (a). It is an involuntary transfer of title in that a third party will be able to claim
the property from the rightful owner.

21. True/False: John gives his land to Jones for life and then to Smith. John must have had some form
of a fee estate.

True. Otherwise, he could not have given a remainder (give all of his interest in the property) to Smith.

22. True/False: T conveys Blackacres to W for life then to James. While W was in possession of the
land, Miller entered, occupied it, improved it, and lived there for twenty five years, far in excess of the
time required to establish adverse possession. Miller is now the owner of the land in fee simple.

False. A person can only acquire through adverse possession what the other person had. W had a life
estate. Miller completed all the requirements to take a life estate in the property by adverse
possession. When W dies, Miller’s life estate will come to an end.


23. True/False: Jack and Jill own half of the property as joint tenants with each other. Betty and Tom
own the other half of the property as joint tenants with each other. Five years later, Betty dies. Five
years after that, Tom dies. Tom’s will leaves everything to his daughter Laura. Jack and Jill will now own
Tom’s share of the property.

False. Jack and Jill only owns half of the property in joint tenancy with each other. They have no legal
interest in the other half of the property.


24. True/False: X gave his apartment building “to Y so long as the building is at least fifty percent
occupied during the next 20 years; but if not so occupied, then to Z” Does Z have an executory interest?

True. The future interest goes to a third party when the condition (the building is at least 50% occupied)
is violated.


25. True/False: Bill gave his property to Rev Miller because Bill believed the reverend was honest and
that he would build a magnificent church on this property. If the reverend refuses to build a church, Bill
will likely receive an injunction forcing the reverend to build the church.

False. The property was conveyed because of a mistaken belief on the part of Bill. The fact situation
does not indicate the existence of a condition or a promise that the reverend would build a church on
the property.


26. True/False: The crime of solicitation cannot be committed if the solicited person refuses to
participate.

False. The target crime need not be committed in order for the crime of solicitation to be committed.
Once the person is solicited, the crime has been committed.


27. True/False. Robbery is the crime of larceny accompanied by force or the threat of force.

True.


 28. A points an unloaded gun at B and threatens to shoot. Unseen by A, C witnesses the threat and
believes A’s gun is loaded and that B is about to die. C pulls out a gun and shoots and kills A.

a. C cannot successfully use the privilege of defense of others because A’s gun was unloaded.
b. C can successfully use the privilege of defense of others because of his reasonable belief at the time
he shot A.
c. One can use deadly force only to protect himself and his immediate family; therefore, C is liable.
d. Deadly force was not being threatened against B and hence C had no right to use deadly force.

The correct answer is (b). C is entitled to come to the defense of A, and under the circumstances as
described, he would be valid in doing so.


29. True/False: For the crime of conspiracy to be committed, an act in furtherance of the conspiracy
must be committed. A perfectly legal act could satisfy this requirement.

True.

30. True/False. In some cases, voluntary intoxication can be a valid defense to a criminal charge.

True. This could happen in specific intent crimes.

Transfer and Control of Real Property

Transfer and Control of Real Property

1. Transfer of real property. Transfer of real property usually takes place in three ways.

a. By deed,
b. By will
c. Adverse possession.

2. Transfer of real property by deed. This is the most common method by which real
property is transferred from one person to another. Usually, the buyer and seller will sign a
contract for the sale of the property, and upon the payment of the purchase price, the deed to
the property is delivered by the seller to the buyer.

a. Contract rules. General contract laws govern the sale of real property.

b. Statute of Frauds. The Statute of Frauds applies to the sale of real property, and most
contracts will have to be evidenced by writing.

c. Marketable title. In a contract for the sale of real property, there is an implied
obligation that marketable title to the real property will be conveyed. Marketable title is a
title that is free from encumbrances (mortgage, easements, leases, etc.), defects in the
chain of title, and adverse possession and exercise of eminent domain.

d. Title search. It is customary for the purchaser of real property to conduct a title search.
This is a search of prior owners of the property to make sure that the current seller is
indeed the owner of the property.

e. Title insurance. Once a title search is conducted and it shows that the seller is indeed
the owner of the property, the buyer will purchase title insurance. This is a onetime
insurance purchase that will give to the buyer the purchase price if it turns out that the
seller was not the real owner of the property.

f. Warranty of habitability. In the past, the rule of caveat emptor applied to the sale of
real property. Unless the seller made specific guarantees with respect to the property, the
seller was not responsible for defective conditions. This rule has been changed in most
states especially where the seller is in the business of building and selling residential
dwellings. Most courts will find that an implied warranty that the dwelling is habitable
attaches to the sale contract.

3. Types of deeds. Three types of deeds are commonly used in conveying real property. Each
deed has special characteristics and rights.

a. Warranty deed. In this deed, the grantor (seller) promises that he or she has valid title
to the property, and will protect the buyer in the event there is a defect in the title. The
seller may also guarantee that the buyer will have quiet enjoyment of the property in
addition to other covenants.

b. Special warranty deed. A special warranty deed is much more restrictive in the protection it gives to the buyer. The seller guarantees that he or she did not take any
steps that would negatively affect the title to the property.

c. Quitclaim deed. In this deed, the seller says simply that he or she will transfer whatever
interest he or she has in the land to the buyer. This deed is used in situations where it
appears as though a person may have some interest in real property, and he or she will
relinquish his or her rights in the property by using this deed.

4. Formal requirement for the transfer of real property.

a. Deed. The transfer of property is completed using a written document which complies
with the Statute of Frauds. The deed will usually contain a description of the real
property that is being conveyed.

b. Delivery of the deed. The transfer of the property does not take place until the deed is
delivered from the grantor (seller) to the grantee (buyer) or the intent to do so is clearly
established. The best evidence of delivery is physical delivery of the deed. But if the
seller delivers the deed to an escrow agent, for example, the intent to deliver may be
established.

c. Recording of transfer. When property is sold, it is not necessary to record the transfer
in order for the transfer to be valid. It would be very foolish, however, not to record the
transfer.

1) Recording act. The purpose of recording a purchase in property is to prevent
someone from becoming a subsequent purchaser in good faith. If the same property
is sold to two different buyers by an unscrupulous seller, the second buyer who
bought the land without knowledge that the same land has already been sold is the
subsequent buyer (second buyer) in good faith (without knowledge of the prior sale).
In certain situations, the subsequent buyer in good faith will receive the property
ahead of the prior purchaser.

a) How the recording act works. Smith buys a piece of property. The seller,
Collins, sells the same property to Jones. If Smith had not recorded the sale,
when Jones had a title search done prior to buying it, it showed that Collins was
the owner of the property (Smith bought the land, but did not record), and Jones
went ahead and purchased the land from him. Jones, as the subsequent purchaser
in good faith, would probably prevail over Smith. On the other hand, if Smith
recorded his purchase he could not lose the property to Jones. When Collins tried
to sell the same property to Jones, Jones would order a title search which would
show that Smith was the real owner, not Collins.

5. Real property terminology.

a. Secured transaction. A secured transaction is one in which a property is used as
security or collateral to support the debt.

b. Mortgage. A mortgage is simply a security interest in a piece of property. When a
property is subject to a mortgage, this interest should be recorded so that the purchaser of
the property will be aware of the fact that the buyer may also inherit an unpaid debt along
with the property. The debtor is referred to as the mortgagor and the creditor is called the
mortgagee. c. Rights of the mortgagor. In most states, the mortgagor holds the title to the property. If
the property is sold along with the mortgage, the buyer is not responsible for the
mortgage unless he or she specifically agreed to assume this debt.

d. Foreclosure. This is an action whereby the mortgagee takes the property from the
mortgagor, ends the mortgagor’s rights in the property, and sells the property to pay the
mortgage debt. If the sale of the property is not sufficient to pay the mortgage, the
mortgagee may attach other assets of the mortgagor.

6. Adverse possession. In most states, a person (the adverse possessor) who openly and
continuously occupies and uses land of another person for a required period of time will
become the owner of the property.

a. Purpose: The law of adverse possession is designed to penalize owners of property who
do not make productive use of property (leaves the property unattended and dormant) and
to reward those who make productive use of property even if the property belongs to
another person.

b. Open use of property. The adverse possessor must use the property openly, giving
notice to the world that it is being used.

c. Continuous use. In most cases, the use must be for 20 years without interruption. In
some cases, the length of continuous use is as short as 5 years.

7. Public and private control. The state has the authority to regulate the use of private
property. In placing restrictions on how certain properties can be used, it is possible that the
regulation will diminish the value of the land. The state does not have to compensate the
owner for such diminished value.

a. Zoning. Zonings laws restrict the use of property by placing height limits on buildings,
designate a percentage of an area to be open spaces, restrict certain activities in
designated areas, etc.

b. Variance. A variance is simply an exception to the general zoning law so that height
limitation, for example, may be waived for a specific building.

c. Nonconforming use. This is simply a use of property that is inconsistent with existing
zoning regulations. This situation arises when a change is made in a zoning regulation
and an established business which was authorized under the old zoning regulation is no
longer in compliance. In such situations, the business is given a reasonable time before it
must discontinue.

d. Eminent domain. This is the power of the government to take private property for
public use. The owner of the property must receive compensation.

Interests in Real Property

Interests in Real Property

1. Real property in general: Interests in real property can be divided into two broad
categories: possessory and non-possessory.

a. Possessory: Possessory interests in real property are called estates, and can be classified
either as freehold estates or leasehold estates.

b. Nonpossessory: Nonpossessory interests in real property include categories such as
easements, profits, and licenses.

Property may be held by one person or by more than one person who jointly hold an
undivided interest in the real property.

2. Freehold estates: Freehold estates are a form of ownership that gives the owner the right to
possess and use the property. There are a number of categories of freehold estates, and they
are categorized according to their potential duration. Some estates can last forever, some
only for the life of the person holding it.

a. Fee estate: These estates give the owner the right to possess and to use the land. There
are a number of categories of fee estates. All have the potential to last forever, but some
fee estates may have conditions that will end the estate if they occur.

1) Fee simple absolute estate: Also referred to as fee simple or just fee the form of
ownership one acquires when one buys real property without any conditions. It is
absolute ownership. The owner can sell it, give it away, take out loans using the land
as collateral, etc. Since this is absolute ownership, the estate can last forever so long
as taxes are paid and the property is maintained.

2) Qualified fee estates: Qualified fee estates are made up of simple determinable, fee
simple subject to a condition subsequent, and fee simple subject to an executory
interest. These estates come with some sort of condition. The estates have the
potential to last forever, but if a condition is violated, the estates can come to an end.
Example: Jones conveys the property known as Greenacres to Miller so long as the
property is not used for gambling purposes. Miller will have this land forever, but if
he should allow gambling to take place (the prohibited condition), the estate will
come to an end.

The owner of the estate has the right to sell or give away the property, but the
condition will transfer to the new owner.

3) Life estates: When a property is given to someone and the duration of the estate is
measured by a person’s life, the estate is called a life estate.

Example: Jones conveys the property known as Blackacres to Baker for her life.
Baker has a life estate. It will last as long as she is alive. Upon her death, the property
will return to Jones or his or her heirs. a) What the life estate owner may do with the land: Baker may use and enjoy the
land, but Baker may not exploit the land. She will have to return the land to the
next owner in much the same condition that she received it. The only exception
to the rule regarding exploitation of the land is if the only use of the estate that is
received is for purposes of exploitation.

Example: If a life estate in a gold mine is given, the life estate holder may mine
for gold.

b) Waste: The life estate holder cannot commit what is known as waste. Waste takes
place when the property is deliberately destroyed (affirmative waste), or not
maintained properly and is allowed to deteriorate (permissive waste), or when the
character of the property is changed (ameliorating waste).

Example: An old mansion is converted into a modern parking lot. Even if the
property is more productive, the character of this land has been changed.

3. Leasehold estates: A lease takes place when possession to a property is transferred from the
landlord to a tenant pursuant to a contract. The statute of frauds requires that the contract be
in writing if the lease is for a period longer than a year. There are different categories of
leases:

a. Tenancy for years: This is a lease for a specific period of time. It can be for a week, a
month, a year, or several years. Since the beginning and the ending date are known, there
is no need to give notice to end this lease.

b. Periodic tenancy: In this tenancy, the lease is for a set period of time (The period may be
for a week or a month, etc) and the lease will continue to renew for a new period until
notice to end the lease is given by the tenant or the landlord. How much notice must be
given usually depends upon the length of each period. In a month-to-month tenancy, a
month’s notice would be required. The maximum required notice is six months.

1) By implication: A periodic tenancy can be created by implication. If a tenant moves
into an apartment without a contract, but gives the landlord a check for $700 each
month, most courts would find a periodic tenancy with the period being one month.

c. Tenancy at will: This is a lease that can be terminated at anytime by either the tenant or
the landlord. Because of this feature, this type of lease was usually limited to tenants and
landlords who have a trusting relationship such as leases between family members.

d. Tenancy at sufferance: This is a tenancy that is created when a tenant refuses to vacate a
property after the end of a lease.

4. The right of landlords and tenants to transfer their property interests: The landlord can
sell or give away his or her property to another even if the property is leased. The new owner
will acquire the land with the existing lease and must honor the terms of the lease. A tenant
may transfer his or her lease by making a sub-lease or an assignment.

a. Assignment: An assignment takes place when a tenant transfers all of his or her rights
under the lease to another tenant.

Example: Jones signed a two-year lease for an apartment. After four months, Jones
assigns the lease to Davis and moves out. Jones has made an assignment. Even though Jones is no longer a tenant, Jones is still liable for the lease payments to the landlord if
Davis is unable to make the payment.

b. Sublease: A sublease takes place when the tenant transfers a part of the lease to another
person.

Example: Jones signs a two-year lease for a three bedroom apartment. She rents one of
the bedrooms to Buckley. Jones has made a sublease. In the case of a sublease, only
Jones is responsible to the landlord for the lease payments. Buckley is not in a contractual
relationship with the landlord.

5. Obligations of landlords and tenants with regard to the rental agreement:

a. Obligations of the tenant: The tenant’s primary obligation is to make the lease
payments, and to use the property in a reasonable manner. The tenant is not liable for
normal wear and tear or for damages that are not the fault of the tenant. The parties to a
lease can modify the agreement and impose additional terms.

1) Eviction: A tenant can be evicted for breaching a leave lease covenant. If a tenant is
evicted, the obligation to pay the lease comes to an end. A lease with a survival
clause, would obligate the tenant to pay the difference between the payment the
tenant was making and the payment the landlord is able to receive from a new tenant.

2) Abandonment: If the tenant abandons the property before the lease ends, the tenant’s
obligation to make the lease payment ends if the landlord reenters the property. If a
survival clause is in place, the landlord may enter and still hold the tenant liable for
the lease payment.

b. The landlord’s responsibility: The landlord has the responsibility to make sure the
tenant is able to occupy and enjoy the property. These rights are called the right to quiet
enjoyment of the property. A part of the landlord’s obligation is to make sure the
premises are safe and are in conformity with local housing codes.

1) Fitness for use: Where residential units are concerned, most courts have found an
implied warranty of habitability in all leases. If the rental unit does not conform to the
housing codes, the landlord has violated this warranty.

2) Eviction: Quite obviously, if the tenants are unlawfully evicted by the landlord, their
right to quiet enjoyment would have been violated. In some cases, a tenant may be
deemed to have been evicted without being formally evicted.

Example: If the property is in such disrepair that a reasonable person would no
longer use the property and the landlord has refused to make the necessary repairs,
the tenant may leave and sue the landlord under a theory of constructive eviction.

3) Duty to make repairs: The landlord is responsible for making repairs to the common
areas of the rental unit. This would include areas such as the garage, roof, lobby, etc.
In addition, the landlord must make sure that the rental unit, before it is turned over to
the tenant, is in a safe condition, and basic repairs have been made. Basic repairs refer
to things such as a working heater, running water, functioning toilet, etc.

6. Concurrent Ownership: A property may be held by one person or more people. When two
or more people jointly own property, they are co-tenants. Each is entitled to an undivided half interest in the entire property. Neither has a claim to a specific portion of the property.
There are several forms of joint ownership of property.

a. Tenancy in common: This is the most common form of joint ownership. Each joint
owner has a co-interest in an undivided half of the property. Each is free to sell his or her
portion of the property at anytime. Upon the death of one joint owner, his or her interest
will be disposed according to the terms of the person’s will.

b. Joint tenancy: The ownership feature is the same as in tenancy in common. What is
special about joint tenancy is the right of survivorship. When one joint owner dies, the
surviving joint owner automatically becomes the owner of the entire property.

c. Tenancy by the Entireties: Similar to joint tenancy, tenancy by the entireties can only
be acquired by married couples.

2. Future interests: A future interest is a property right that will become possessory at some
point in the future.

Example: Jones conveys the property known as Blackacres to Baker for her life then to
Davis in fee simple absolute.

Davis will receive full ownership of Blackacres when Baker dies. Davis has a future interest.
Future interests can be classified into the following categories:

a. Reversion: This is the future interest that is retained by the owner of a property when he
or she gives a lesser interest in the property to another person.

Example: Jones conveys a property to Baker for her life. Baker has a life estate. When
Baker dies, the property will come back to Jones. Jones has a reversion.

b. Possibility of a reverter: Possibility of reverter is the future interest that is held by the
grantor of a property when a fee simple determinable is given. If the condition that
attaches to this estate is violated, the property will be returned to the grantor.

Example: Jones gives his land to Thomas so long as the land is not used for gambling.
Thomas has a Fee simple determinable. If gambling takes place on the property three
years later, the property comes back to Jones. Jones has a future interest called a
possibility of reverter.

c. Remainder: A remainder is a future interest that is created in someone other than the
grantor when a lesser property that is conveyed to another person comes to a natural end.
Example: Jones conveys to Baker a life estate in Greenacres with a remainder to
Williams in fee simple. Williams has a remainder.

1) Requirements for a remainder:

a) Created in a third person, not the grantor: The future interest is held by a third
party (Williams), not the grantor (Jones).

b) At the natural expiration of the prior lesser estate: The prior estate must come
to a natural end. In the above case, the prior estate, a life estate, comes to a natural
end when Baker dies. c) Same conveyance (document): The prior estate and the remainder estate must be
created in the same document. In the above example, the life estate (to Baker) and
the remainder (to Williams) were both created in the same document.

(1) Vested remainder: In a vested remainder, the person who holds the
remainder is known when the remainder was created.
Example: in the above example, we know that Williams will receive the
remainder. Her interest is vested.

(2) Contingent remainder: In a contingent remainder, the exact person who will
get the remainder has not been determined.

Example: Jones conveys a life estate to Baker with the remainder to the first
born girl of Betty Smith in fee simple. At the time of the conveyance Smith
does not have a little girl. The remainder is contingent. When a little girl is
born to Smith, the remainder will change into a vested remainder.

3. Nonpossessory Interest in Real Property: Nonpossessory interest in land allows the holder
of the interest to go on to the land and use the land or take something from the land, but not
possess the land.

a. Easement: An easement gives the holder the right to use the land of another person for a
specific purpose.

Example: Holders of easements may have the right to cross over another person’s
property, to lay a power or telephone line over another person’s property, etc.

1) Dominant and servient estates: Suppose that Jones, owner of Greenacres, gives
James, the owner of Blackacres, the right to cross over Greenacres. Blackacres is
considered the dominant estate because the owner of Blackacres is helped by this
easement. Greenacres is the servient estate because it is burdened by the easement.

2) Easement appurtenant and easement in gross: Easements appurtenant are
easements that attach to the land. In the above example, the right of the owner of
Blackacres to walk across a portion of Greenacres attaches to Blackacres. If James,
the current owner of Blackacres, sells the land to someone else, that person also will
have the right to walk across Greenacres. In some cases, the easement does not attach
to a specific land. It is, instead, held by a person or a company.
Example: PGE has an easement to run a power line over Whiteacres. This easement
is held by PGE and the benefits of this easement do not attach to any property.

3) Creation of easements:

a) Express grant: Two parties formally negotiate and create an easement.

b) Necessity: An owner of a property divides her property into two parts and sells
the back lot. The owner of the back lot does not have access to a road, the lot is
landlocked. Most courts would give the owner of the back lot an easement of
passage over the front half of the property in order to make the back lot useable.

c) Prescription or adverse possession: If certain conditions are met, a person could
acquire an easement which is adverse to the interest of the property owner simply
by using a portion of someone else’s land.

b. Profits:

c. License:

Sample Questions #3

1. A statute requires all vessels traveling on the Great Lakes to provide lifeboats.  One of Winston Steamship Company’s boats is sent out of port without a lifeboat.  Perry, a sailor, falls overboard in a storm so heavy that had there been a lifeboat it could not have been launched.  Perry drowns.  Is Winston liable to Perry’s estate?  Please discuss. 
2. Escola, a waitress, was injured when a bottle of Coca-Cola exploded in her hand while she was putting it into the restaurant’s cooler.  The bottle came from a shipment that had remained under the counter for thirty-six hours, after being delivered by the bottling company.  The bottler had subjected the bottle to the method of testing for defects commonly used in the industry, and there is no evidence that Escola or anyone else did anything to damage the bottle between its delivery and the explosion.  Escola brought an action against the bottler for damages.  Because she is unable to show any specific acts of negligence on its part, she seeks to rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.  Should she be able to recover on this theory?  Please explain.
3. Nathan is run over by a car and left lying in the street.  Sam, seeing Nathan’s helpless state, places him in his car for the purpose of taking him to the hospital. Sam drives negligently into a ditch, causing additional injury to Nathan.  Is Sam liable to Nathan?  Please discuss.

ANSWERS:

Question 1.  The fact situation tells us that there is a law which requires all vessels sailing on the Great Lakes to have lifeboats on board.  This law defines one of the duties boats sailing on the Great Lakes must follow.  This duty was breached when one of Winston Steamship Company’s ships set sail without the required lifeboats.   This breach of duty was not, however, the cause of Perry’s death.  This is because the fact situation tells us that life boats simply could not have been launched due to the severity of the storm.  Even if the ship carried lifeboats, it would not have made a difference.  Lacking the required causation, there is no liability.

Question 2. Res ipsa loquitur is a technique which can be used by a plaintiff to create an inference of negligent behavior in situations where it is difficult to explain how something took place.  In order for Escola to use this technique, she must be able to demonstrate three things:

• Negligence required.  The accident which took place could not have taken place in the absence of negligence.  This element is satisfied because a bottle of Coca Cola should never have exploded simply by the act of moving it from one location in the restaurant to the refrigerator.  The bottle could only have exploded due to negligence in the construction of the bottle, negligence in placing the Coca Cola within the bottle, negligence in the formulation of the Coca Cola, etc. 

• The plaintiff most likely is responsible for the negligence.  This element is satisfied because the fact situation tells us that the defendant, Coca Cola Co. created the soft drink, filled and capped the bottle, and delivered it.  It may also have been responsible for making the bottle as well.  This degree of control by the defendant shows that the act of negligence must have taken place while the bottle was under the defendant’s supervision and control.  (some of the students were misled by the fact that industry standards were observed in the manufacture of the bottles, and concluded that negligence may not have taken place.  This may simply be a case where the industry standard was insufficient or applied incorrectly.)   

• The defendant did not contribute to her injury.  This element is satisfied because the fact situation tells us the bottles were stored under the counter, and the only thing Escola did was to transfer the bottle from the place of storage to the refrigerator. What she did could not have contributed to the bottle exploding.

Conclusion:  All three elements necessary to use res ipsa loquitur have been shown.

Question 3.  The fact situation for this question does not indicate any type of relationship between Sam and Nathan which would require Sam to come to Nathan’s aid.  But once Sam made the decision to help Nathan, he was under a legal duty to act in a reasonable manner.  The fact situation indicated that Sam drove in a negligent manner while he was taking Nathan to the hospital, and this resulted in an accident which caused further injury to Nathan.  The act of driving in a negligent manner breached Sam’s duty, and this was the cause of Nathan’s additional injury.  When someone drives in a negligent manner, it is entirely foreseeable that an accident in which others might be injured could take place.  There is, therefore, proximate cause to hold Sam responsible.

Negligence and Strict Liability

Negligence and Strict Liability 

1. The structure of tort remains the same whether the tort is committed intentionally or through
an act of negligence. In both cases, it must be shown that there was a duty, the duty to act
reasonably was violated, this violation caused the injury, and there was proximate cause.

a. Negligence defined: An act is negligent if it falls below the standard established by law
for the protection of others. This is another way of saying that if a person created, by his
or her behavior, a situation with potential for causing unreasonably high risk of harm, and
if someone is injured as a result, liability will follow. In determining whether a behavior
was unreasonable or not, the following factors would be examined in light of the
circumstances:

1) The probability that the harm would take place
2) The seriousness of the harm
3) The social usefulness of the conduct that created the risk
4) The cost of any precautionary measures that could have reduced the level of risk

f. The Reasonable Person Test: A good shorthand to decide whether a person’s conduct
was reasonable or not is to use the “reasonable person” test. In using this test, we ask how
a person who is both reasonable and prudent would have acted in the same situation.

1) Children: Children must also act prudently and reasonably keeping in mind his or her
age and knowledge. But when a child engages in adult activities such as operating a
car, in many states, he or she is held to the same standard as an adult.

2) People with disabilities: If a person has a disability, he or she is expected to act as a
reasonable person with that disability.

3) Superior skill: A person with specialized knowledge, such as attorneys, doctors,
accountants, carpenters, and pilots are expected to behave in a way that reasonable
persons with the specialized knowledge would behave.

4) Mental deficiency: A person with a mental deficiency is expected to behave in the
same reasonable manner that would be expected from a person without the mental
disability.

5) Emergency situation: The fact that an emergency situation may exist does not
change the standard. A person is expected to act in a reasonable manner in light of the
emergency.

g. Legal requirement and the reasonable person test: In some instances, the law will
define the conduct that is expected.

1) Where the law defines the conduct that is expected, if the conduct causing the injury
fell short of what was required by law, most court would find that the conduct was
negligence per se.

Example: a law requires that employers issue hard hats to every worker at a
construction site. A hard hat was not issued to David, who was hired today to work at
the site, and to Sally, a city inspector, who came to check on the construction. Both
were hurt by falling debris. In a lawsuit, David would not have to prove that the
employer was negligent. The fact that the law requiring all employees to have hard
hats was violated would automatically show that the employer’s behavior was
negligent. Sally, since she was not an employee, would not be covered by the law.
She would have to prove that the act of not issuing a hard hat was unreasonable
behavior and hence negligent.

2) Complying with the law is not enough: If a law defines how a person should behave
in a given situation, that law sets only the minimum standard. Depending upon the
circumstances, just obeying the law may not be enough.

Example: Even though the posted speed limit is 65 mph, driving 65 mph in a severe
rainstorm that reduced visibility would not be reasonable. The reasonable person test
would require the driver to drive at a speed that would be safe under the
circumstances.

h. Duty to act: This is the first step in the analysis of a tort case. If there is no legal duty to
act, the analysis need proceed no further. Please remember that there is a difference
between a legal duty and moral duty to act.

1) Duty of a landowner: A property owner must use the property in a reasonable
manner. He or she cannot use the land in a way that might cause harm to others.

2) Degree of care of landowners: The degree of care the landowner must exercise
towards visitors on the land depends upon their classification with respect to the land.

a) Duty to trespassers: A trespasser is someone who enters another’s property
without permission. Generally, the landowner is not responsible for the safety of
trespassers, but many courts require that once a landowner is aware of the
presence of the trespasser (or knows that people enter his or her property on a
regular basis) there is a duty to make sure the property is safe.

b) Duty to licensees: A licensee is a member of the family, a guest, an uninvited
salesperson, etc. They are on the property with the consent of the owner. The
property owner has a duty to warn licensees of dangerous activities and conditions
that may not be apparent.

Example: Jason was invited to a large country estate for dinner. The dirt road,
which appeared to be solid, can become quite slippery when it is wet. During the
dinner, there is a short but violent downpour. The owner of the property has a
duty to warn Jason that the road may now be hazardous.

(1) A licensee may become a trespasser: A licensee can become a trespasser if
he or she exceeds the scope of the permission that allowed him or her to come
onto the land. A person who is permitted to come onto the property to sell
encyclopedia exceeds the scope of his or her permission if he or she wanders
onto parts of the property that is not required in order for the sale to be made.

c) Duty to invitees: An invitee is a member of the public who is invited onto the
land for the purpose for which the land is open to the public (park, beach,
swimming pool) or a person who is invited onto the land to conduct business
(shoppers at a store, repair person coming to make repairs, etc.). The landowner is
responsible for protecting the invitee against dangerous conditions they are
unlikely to spot. This responsibility extends not only for dangerous conditions that
he or she is aware of, but also conditions that he or she should have known about.

i. Causation in fact: This is a requirement that the person’s breach of the duty of
reasonable care was the actual cause of the injury or damage. If the injury or damage
would have been caused no matter how careful the person was, liability would not result
unless this was a special case to which the concept of strict liability applies.

1) Substantial factor test: If two people, acting independently, cause damage or harm
in a situation where the act of just one of the persons would have been enough to
cause the harm or damage, both parties are liable.

Example: Two hunters, shooting their shotguns at a deer, shoot an innocent
bystander. In this case, both were substantial cause of the injury and both are liable
even though the act of one person alone would have been enough.

j. Proximate cause: This is a social policy issue. Not every event that flows from a
negligent act results in liability. In general, courts will limit liability to those damaging
acts that are foreseeable.

1) Unforeseeable consequences: The reason the law does not want to impose liability
for injuries that are not foreseeable is because there is nothing that a reasonable
person could have done to prevent the damage. If the damage was unforeseeable, how
would a person have guarded against the consequences?

2) Superseding causes: A superseding cause is a force that comes into play after the
negligent act and which, either together with the negligent act or independently,
causes the damage or harm or aggravates the damage or harm.

Example: Adrian, driving negligently, hits Bill and injures his leg. Bill is taken to a
hospital where he is operated in a negligent manner and dies. Is Adrian liable? The solution depends upon how foreseeable the resulting harm to Bill was. Adrian’s act
caused Bill to be placed in the hospital where he required an operation. When patients
undergo an operation, does medical malpractice occur from time to time? The answer
is yes. Therefore Adrian—and the doctor—would be liable.

See the case of Petition of Kinsman Transit Co.
See the case of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

7. Defenses to negligence:

a. Contributory negligence: If the injured person’s own behavior contributed to the injury,
he or she cannot recover. This doctrine is recognized in only a few states.

1) Last clear chance: In order to ameliorate the harshness of the contributory
negligence rule, the last clear chance rule was developed. Even though the plaintiff’s
behavior fell below that of a reasonable person, if the defendant had the last
opportunity to prevent the harm or injury, the plaintiff would be able to sue.

b. Comparative negligence: If the plaintiff’s action contributed to his or her harm, under
this theory, the degree of fault on the part of the plaintiff and the defendant are measured.
Example: John was driving negligently when he hit and injured Stewart who was
crossing the street against a red light. Stewart suffers $100,000 of injuries. If it is
determined at the trial that Stewart was 25% responsible for the injury and John was 75%
responsible, Stewart would recover $75,000.

1) Limit on comparative negligence: In most states, if the plaintiff’s behavior
contributed 50% or more to the injury, he or she would not be able to recover. If in
the above example, Stewart was 60% responsible for the injury and John was 40%
responsible, Stewart would not be able to recover anything in most states. In some
states, he could recover $40,000.

c. Assumption of risk: This is a case where a person knowingly and voluntarily assumes
the risk of injury.

Example: A professional prize fighter assumes the risks that he may suffer serious injury
when he enters the ring to fight.

8. Strict liability: In a limited number of cases, the law will hold a defendant responsible for
injuries to others even though the person did everything possible to prevent the injuries from
taking place. This is an example of strict liability. It is often called absolute liability or
liability without fault. The rationale is that the activities engaged in by the defendant are such
that society will hold the defendant liable for all injuries proximately caused by the activities.

Strict liability applies in the following situations:

a. Abnormally dangerous activities: Strict liability is imposed in cases where a person
engages in activities that are abnormally dangerous. Abnormally dangerous activities are
activities that are unusual, involve a high risk of serious harm, and the harm cannot be
eliminated by exercise of reasonable care.

Examples:

1) Storing explosives and flammable liquids in large quantities
2) Blasting and pile driving activities
3) Emitting natural gas in a populated area

On the other hand, courts have not found strict liability in cases where the land is used in
a manner consistent with the surrounding area. Examples include:

1) Drilling for oil in an established oil field

2) Transmitting natural gas through pipes

b) Keeping of wild animals: People who keep wild animals are responsible for harm and
injuries caused by the animals.

1) Trespassing animals: When animals trespass upon someone else’s property and
cause damage, the owner is subject to strict liability. There are three exceptions:

(a) Dogs and cats: Owners of dogs and cats are liable for damages caused by their
trespassing pets only if negligence can be shown.

(b) Keepers of animals that stray from highways where they are being
transported are not liable unless negligence is shown.

(c) Farm animals: In certain parts of the country, owners of freely grazing animals
are not liable for damage to a neighboring property unless negligence is shown.

2) Non-trespassing animals: Owners of wild animals are strictly liable for harm
caused by such animals. Examples of wild animals are: bears, lions, elephants,
monkeys, deer, raccoons, etc.

(a) Domestic animals defined: Domesticated animals are animals that are
traditionally devoted to the service of mankind and are considered to be safe.

Examples are dogs, cats, horses, cattle, etc.

Owners of domestic animals are liable for harm and injury caused by these
animals if they knew or should have known of the animal’s dangerous propensity.
The harm must result from the animal’s dangerous propensity.

Example: We expect that a dog will bite another dog or a person, but strict
liability will not result from that. A propensity to bite among dogs is not regarded
as a dangerous propensity. On the other hand if the owner of a 150-pound
sheepdog knows that the dog has a tendency to jump playfully on others, an injury
caused by the dog jumping on another person would be a case where strict
liability would apply.

c) Products liability: Manufacturers of products that result in injury to the users and others
may be strictly liable.

d) Defenses to strict liability: Because of the nature of strict liability, there are very few
defenses. In some cases of products liability, a limited comparative negligence defense
may be permitted. Voluntary assumption of risk may also apply in certain cases.

Example: A person knowingly and voluntarily parks his car in an area where explosives
are being discharged. If his car is damaged by flying debris, he may be precluded from
filing suit.

Intentional Torts

Intentional Torts

1. Purpose of tort law: Tort law is designed to provide relief from acts of civil wrongs or
injuries to their person, property, economic, and other interests.

2. Intent of tort law: The intent of tort law is to accomplish the following:

1) Compensation: Compensate people who sustained harm or loss as a result of someone
else’s conduct.

1) Punitive damages: While the primary purpose of tort law is to compensate, not
punish the wrongdoer, in cases where the behavior that caused the injury were
outrageous, courts will assess punitive damages as a form of punishment. The intent
of assessing punitive damages is to discourage similar outrageous behavior.

2) Allocation of fault: To make sure the person who was responsible for causing the harm
be responsible for making the compensation.

3) Prevent future harm:

3. Connection between tort law and criminal law: In many cases, when a tort law is violated,
a criminal law is violated as well.

Example: Unprovoked, Henry strikes Bill in the face, damaging Bill’s tooth. Bill will be
able to sue Henry for compensation necessary to repair his damaged tooth and for the general
damages he suffered. Henry may also be prosecuted by the District Attorney’s office for
violating the criminal law of battery.

4. Structure of tort law: A plaintiff who is suing for compensation must show the following:

1) Duty: The defendant was under a duty to behave in a certain way.

Example: We all have a duty to drive our cars in a manner that is safe.

2) Breach of duty: The duty was breached in some way. In the case of someone who is
operating a car, the duty to drive safely would be breached if the driver drove under the
influence of drugs or alcohol or disregarded the applicable traffic laws.

3) Causation: The breach of the duty was the cause of the injury. A driver was driving
under the influence of alcohol, lost control of his car, and hit a pedestrian. The driver’s
breach of the duty to drive safely was the cause of the injury.

4) Proximate Cause: The breach of the duty must also be the proximate cause of the injury.
Proximate cause is a public policy issue. Once we determine that a person’s action or lack
of action caused injury to someone, we then ask whether the person should be held
responsible. In some cases, injury may result in a way that could not have been
anticipated. If it could not have been anticipated, steps designed to prevent the injury
could not have been taken. In these cases, should we still hold the person responsible?
This is the issue proximate cause is designed to answer.

5) Damages:

5. Ways in which a tort may be committed: a. Intentionally: A person deliberately breaches a duty and thereby causes harm. Intent, in  the case of tort, refers not to evil or hostile motives. It simply means that the person acted  in order to bring about a certain result or knew or should have known that certain result
would occur by his or her act.

b. Negligently: Where a person’s conduct falls below that of a reasonable person.

c. Strict liability: In certain cases, causation and liability are automatic when a prohibited
event takes place.

6. Scope of tort law: Tort law is designed to provide relief for injury to a person’s physical and
mental well being, business interests, interest in his or her reputation, etc. The following
categories illustrate the wide scope of tort law.

a. Harm to the person: Tort law is designed to provide relief for physical harm, harm to a
person’s feelings, etc. Following are examples of tort laws that are designed to protect a
person’s physical and mental well being.

1) Battery: This is the tort of offensive and unpermitted bodily contact. It may be a
blow to a person’s head or an act as simple as knocking someone’s hat off of his or
her head.

2) Assault: This is an act that places someone in immediate fear of being hit. It is a tort
that falls just short of being a battery.

3) False imprisonment: This is an act whereby a person confines a person against his or
her will. It can be caused by the actual use of force or the threat of force.

a) Detaining shoplifters: Merchants who detain shoplifting suspects who turn out to
be innocent may be charged with false imprisonment. Many states have laws
designed to protect merchants by making exceptions in cases where the detention
is based upon probable cause and for a reasonable period of time.

4) Intentional infliction of emotional distress: This is an act where severe emotional
distress is inflicted upon a person by means of an extreme or outrageous conduct. The
conduct may be caused by an intentional or negligent act. This tort does not apply to
the use of abusive language or to cases of rudeness by one worker to another. A case
of sexual abuse by one worker to another would constitute this tort.

b. Harm to a person’s reputation and interest in privacy:

1) Defamation of character: This is an act in which a false statement is made about a
person to a third party that damages the person’s reputation. If the false statement is
made directly to the person the statement is designed to injury, his or her reputation
would not have been harmed. The false statement must be made to a third party.

a) Slander: Cases where the false information is communicated verbally.

b) Libel: Cases where the false information is communicated through more
permanent means such as writing, video tape, sound recording, etc.

c) Defenses:

(1) Absolute privilege: In some cases, our society has determined that the
interests of society would be furthered by allowing statements, whether true or
not, to be made without fear of lawsuits for slander or libel.

Examples of these situations include: testimony in a court of law, statements
made by the President of the United States or cabinet level members of the
Executive branch of government, statements made in committee or from the
floor of the legislature by the members of the legislative branch, a statement
made by one spouse to another.

(2) Conditional privilege: A conditional privilege allows false statements to be
published without legal consequences in certain cases.

Example: If Thomas, a celebrity, makes a slanderous statement, this
statement is considered to be newsworthy, and a newspaper reporter may
report what Thomas said. In repeating Thomas’s statement, the newspaper
cannot be charged with slander.

2) Invasion of privacy: There are four separate torts in this category. They are all
designed to protect a person’s right to privacy or to protect a person’s property
interest in his or her name.

a) Appropriation
b) Intrusion
c) Public disclosure of a private fact
d) Invasion of privacy

c. Harm to a person’s right to be free from abusive law suits: Three separate torts make
up this category. These torts are designed to prevent an individual from using the legal
process—lawsuits—for an improper purpose.

1) Malicious prosecution
2) Abuse of legal process
3) Wrongful civil proceedings

d. Harm to a person’s property:

1) Trespass: This is the act of entering someone else’s property without his or her
permission. This tort is designed to protect a person’s right to exclusive use or his or
her property.

2) Nuisance: This is the act of interfering with someone’s quiet use and enjoyment of
his or her land.

Examples: Playing music so loudly that it interferes with someone’s use of his or her
land, polluting a stream, causing noxious odors and gas to be emitted.

3) Trespass to personal property: This is the act of unauthorized use or dispossession
of someone else’s personal property.

4) Conversion: This is the act of exercising such control over someone else’s personal
property in such a way that full compensation for the value of the property should be
made.

Example: Mary entrusts her car to a car dealer for the purpose of selling it. The staff
of the car dealership uses the car for personal business and places 8,000 miles on the
car.

e. Harm to business interests:

1) Interference with contract: This is an act that interferes with the performance of an
existing contract.

2) Fraudulent misrepresentation: This is an act whereby a false representation is made
in order to induce certain steps in reliance on the false statement.

Example: A land dealer states that property he is trying to sell will increase in value
because a new shopping mall is scheduled to be built next to his lot. In reliance upon
this statement, a buyer buys his lot. A shopping mall is not scheduled to be built.