About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - April 2020)

handle is hein.ali/restate0332 and id is 1 raw text is: 

                                      TORTS 2D


D.N.M.2019.  Cit. generally in disc. Arrestee brought a lawsuit against, among others, police officer,
alleging, inter alia, that defendant lacked the lawful authority to arrest him. This court granted
defendant's motion for summary judgment, holding that plaintiff's claim for false arrest failed, because
the record reflected that defendant had probable cause to effectuate the arrest. In making its decision, the
court noted that New Mexico courts often looked to the Restatement Second of Torts in defining new
areas of tort law. Favela v. City of Las Cruces ex rel. Las Cruces Police Department, 398 F.Supp.3d 858,
923, 924.

D.N.M.2019.  Cit. generally in disc. Arrestees brought, inter alia, a battery claim against police officers,
alleging that defendants unjustifiably arrested them without a warrant. This court denied in part
defendants' motion for summary judgment, holding that a reasonable jury could find that the unjustified
arrests constituted battery. The court explained that it looked to the Restatement Second of Torts to
define the elements of intentional torts, because New Mexico frequently adopted the Restatement for
adjudicating other tort claims. Ward v. City of Hobbs, 398 F.Supp.3d 991, 1087.

Utah, 2019. Cit. generally in disc. After trucking company brought a lawsuit against competitor,
alleging intentional interference with a contract, this court answered a certified question from a district
court and defined what constituted improper means. The court cited a Utah Supreme Court case that
relied on Restatement of Torts § 766 and Restatement Second of Torts § 766 in defining improper
means, noting that a majority of other jurisdictions at the time recognized the Restatements as being
representative of tort law. C.R. England v. Swift Transportation Company, 437 P.3d 343, 348.



§ 4. Duty

Fla.App.2019.  Com. (b) quot. in ftn. Arrestee brought claims for negligence and false arrest against
sheriff s office, alleging that he was arrested and detained for ten days based on a previously executed
warrant that had not been properly voided due to an employee error. The trial court dismissed plaintiff's
suit with prejudice, finding that defendant did not owe plaintiff a duty to ensure that the warrant was
properly recorded in its system. This court reversed in part and remanded, holding that defendant's lack
of duty did not preclude plaintiff from alleging a cause of action for the intentional tort of false arrest.
The court noted that, under Restatement Second of Torts § 4, the concept of duty was rarely used in
dealing with the invasions of legally protected interests by acts that were intended to invade them.
Florez v. Broward Sheriff's Office, 270 So.3d 417, 421.

                             COPYRIGHT 02020 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE
                                           All rights reserved
                                     Printed in the United States of America
          For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most