Study Guides (380,000)
CA (150,000)
Ryerson (10,000)
LAW (600)
LAW 122 (300)
Midterm

LAW 122 Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Qualified Privilege, Urban Sprawl, Stock Market


Department
Law and Business
Course Code
LAW 122
Professor
Clara Chapdelaine- Feliciati
Study Guide
Midterm

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 17 pages of the document.
Law122 Test #1 - Summary
How to solve a legal question?
1. Start with the facts:
a. Read carefully and understand the facts as they determine the relevance of any legal points you make
later
2. Identify the relevant legal issues:
a. What are the parties fighting about? What needs to be resolved? E.g. is the contract enforceable? Has A
committed a tort to B?
b. The order of issues matter, e.g. was there an offer? Was there an acceptance?
c. Deal with one issue at a time
3. Discuss the law relevant to the issue:
a. Is there a legal principle, rule or test relevant? State it in the abstract without referring to the facts yet
b. Cite supporting authorities
4. Apply the law to the facts:
a. Identify the anchor fact = a fact given that links the law to the fact pattern
b. Application = law + anchor facts
c. Drives to your conclusion, which resolves the “issue”
What to avoid when solving a legal question
- Too general introduction and conclusion
- Irrelevancy
- Repeating facts unless incorporated as part of the discussion of the legal issue or application
- Facts of cases cited unless distinguished
- Vague statements and unsupported generalisations since law is a precise and detailed subject.
There are 3 types of torts: Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Vicarious liability.
-Intentional Tort
oA tort occurs when a person intentionally acts in a defined wrongful way. (the intent to harm, act)
-Negligence Tort
oTort occurs when a person acts carelessly but the actions/activity is protected if it is reasonable in the
circumstance
-Vicarious Liability/Strict liability Tort
oA tort occurs when the defendant is responsible for an especially dangerous activity that caused harm
1 | P a g e
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Tort: A failure to fulfill a private obligation imposed by the law
Tortfeasor: A person who commits a tort
Tort Law: Includes almost every sort of private law wrong outside of breach of contract
Types of Torts Torts categorized
Intentional Torts - Assault
- Battery
- False imprisonment
- Trespass to land
- Interference with chattels
- Conspiracy
- Intimidation
- Interference with contractual relations
- Unlawful interference with economic
relations
- Deceit
Negligence Torts - Occupiers’ liability
- Nuisance
- Negligence
- Professional negligence
- Product liability
Strict liability Torts - Animals
- Ryland’s vs Fletcher
The Legal Analysis (General Idea)
- Ask yourself: Is this a tort or a different type of legal wrong?
- If it is a tort, what kind of tort is it? (intentional, negligent or strict liability)
- What tort specifically is involved?
Remember we start with
1) The facts, then
2) We move to the issue (e.g. has x committed a tort against y?), then
3) We state the law (the legal test)
a. What is the legal test? The elements (factors/ingredients/checklist) to show a particular tort has
occurred.
Now that we have the Law, stated as a general principle, let’s move to the specifics of this case. Let’s APPLY the law.
- Identify the “anchor facts”.
2 | P a g e
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

- Apply the law to these facts.
- Application = Law + Anchor Facts
- Your application is your conclusion, and the answer to the “issue” question
Example of a Legal Analysis for Intentional Tort (Russo vs. Ontario Jockey Club)
Facts:
Russo, the plaintiff, was a very skilled bettor and had won a lot of money at horse racing tracks owned by the defendant,
the Ontario Jockey Club. So, the defendant served her with a notice while she was at Woodbine Race Track in TO that
required her to leave the premises. The notice also said that if she returned to any of the defendant’s premises, she
would be charged as a trespasser. Russo sued.
What is the issue?
So, what are the parties fighting about? What questions needs to be resolved here? Can the Ontario Jockey Club legally
keep Russo off their property (woodbine race track and other race tracks owned by the club)? The property is open to
the public.
What’s the Legal test?
The law says that there is implied consent to be on property that is open to the public. But that consent can be
withdrawn with notice, as long as a person is not excluded for reasons that violate the Human Rights Act. (Hint: this case
is more about consent and property that is open to the public than trespass)
The Application
Let’s identify some “anchor facts” (important facts) here.
- The Jockey Club = privately owned property, open to the public
- Russo was told to stay away
- The reasons for excluding her do not violate human rights codes
Now apply the law to these facts.
- Since the Club is private property and since it withdrew consent for Russo to be on the property, Russo no
longer has the right to be there. The Club can now exclude her, and if she returns, she is trespassing.
Tort type #1 - Intentional Tort
Battery
Legal Test
The defendant intends to cause offensive, physical, contact with the plaintiff (victim) that causes harm:
1. Intends to cause
a. When your own body gets in contact with another person body. (Unwanted contact)
b. Doctrine of transferred intent: When you plan on hitting someone but you miss and hit someone else.
You will be guilty of battery against this third person.
3 | P a g e
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version