A Question and Answer session with Prof. McFarland, author of several of CALI's lessons in Tort Law and Civil Procedure. Prof. McFarland has been teaching for over 30 years. His comments in this podcast about the first semester of law school focus on the Socratic method, preparing for class, note-taking during class, class participation, "riding out" that "lost at sea" feel common during the first few weeks of law school, the appropriate use of study aids, advice about law school exams, and general advice on doing well in law school.
- This Subject Area Index lists all CALI lessons covering Torts.
- The Torts Outline allows you to search for terms of art that correspond to topics you are studying to find suggestions for related CALI Lessons.
This lesson identifies the law of the intentional tort of assault, and challenges the student to apply unusual fact situations to that law. The exercise explores the tort of assault as it has developed to cover modern settings.
A plaintiff who voluntarily assumes a risk of harm cannot recover for the negligent or reckless conduct that causes the harm: that is known as assumption of risk. It is a complete defense. This lesson explores the defense, which together with contributory negligence has been part of negligence law for more than a century-and-a-half. The border between the two classic negligence defenses is sometimes confusing, so questions navigate the differences.
This lesson will cover the basic, common law elements of defamation. The discussion will review the defamatory statement, truth, and publication concerning the plaintiff. The lesson will also cover the basic issues in privileges. Although substantial Constitutional issues now exist with defamation, those problems will be covered in a separate lesson.
The Right of Privacy is actually four different torts. This lesson will cover the basic elements of Commercial Appropriation, Intrusion, Public Disclosure, and False Light. Although it is necessary to make references to the Constitutional issues raised with these claims, that issue will be discussed in more detail in a separate lesson.
Battery Basics is an introduction and initial exploration of the intentional tort of battery. It is designed primarily for students who want to test their basic knowledge of the tort, or who spent little or no time on intentional torts in class. Battery Basics identifies the elements of battery, requires application to some common fact situations, and responds to common misconceptions about the tort.
Battery Puzzlers is one of two lessons available from CALI on the intentional tort of battery. The other lesson, Battery Basics, is designed for students who will spend little time on battery in their classes or are uncomfortable with their understanding of the tort. It is designed to provide a solid understanding of battery. This lesson, Battery Puzzlers, is for students who are already familiar with the tort and who want to deepen their understanding and analysis of battery.
This exercise begins by illustrating the distinction between cause in fact and legal or proximate cause and then utilizes questions intended to familiarize the student with the but for or sine qua non test and the substantial factor test. The exercise also covers issues relating to concurrent cause dilemmas and problems in identifying which harm was caused to the plaintiff by multiple negligent defendants.
This exercise builds upon the tutorial entitled Causation in Fact and that lesson should be completed prior to this exercise. In this exercise, the evidentiary burdens of proof are considered in relation to the use of direct and circumstantial evidence and the use of expert testimony. The exercises illuminate issues surrounding problems of proving who or what caused the plaintiff's harm. Burden shifting devices employed by courts in special situations are also considered.
This lesson covers the traditional negligence standard of care for children. It, of course, deals with the exceptional circumstances of when the adult standard applies to children. In addition, the lesson covers other diminished capacity examples, such as mental illness, physical disability, and intoxication.
This lesson covers the area traditionally known as "negligence per se." The problem of when can a civil or criminal statute be used as the standard of care in negligence cases is the primary matter discussed. The lesson gives some special attention to the "Dram Shop" example.
This lesson tries to explain Coasean irrelevance (which is often known as the "Coase Theorem").