Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/534

 The Green Bag

506

'i.e., is unreasonably likely to cause, an

security or liberty, or of a normal prop

effect upon a person or thing that would be in fact a violation of another’s right of life, bodily security or normal

erty right.

property.

A person who has done or is doing an act that may cause such an effect must take such precautions as reason

ableness requires-11a, must use due care——to prevent it.

In many cases no

precautions would reasonably be re quired.

How far this duty corre

sponds to abnormal property rights I have not been able fully to satisfy myself. Intention here means simple intention. A person is guilty of a breach of this duty who plows his neighbor's

land or uses his neighbor's tools mis taking them for his own, or who uses force in supposed self-defense when the occasion does not justify it. There is a duty not to do acts with

Persons who deliver dangerous things

a culpable intention

that undoubt

to others, furnish things for others’ use,

edly corresponds to abnormal property

or invite or entice others or their property into situations of danger, owe certain duties to use care for their

rights and to absolute potestative rights. It is a breach of this willfully to use

protection, the exact nature of which

duties has been a subject for much difference of opinion.

another's trade-mark or to entice his wife to leave him knowing her to be a

wife. There is also a duty not with culpable

intention to interfere in certain ways DUTIES AS TO HARMFUL THINGS The possessor or keeper of a dangerous

thing owes duties to use due care to prevent it from doing harm; if the thing is actively dangerous, the duty may be peremptory, or if it is an animal. Taking the word “nuisance” to denote

a thing having certain harmful qualities, a person must not by his act cause the existence of a nuisance, or at least must

with another’s trade, and also—as I think, though it has been denied by

very high authority—not to do ma licious acts. I have discussed this duty in an article on Malicious Wrongs in the Law Quarterly Review, January, 1904. These last two duties corre spond to all rights in rem except that

of reputation, including the right of pecuniary condition. Their exact con

not do so intentionally or negligently. The possessor of a thing must use due care to prevent it from becoming a

tents are not yet well settled, and they

nuisance; if it is a nuisance, he may be under a duty to abate it, or to use due care to prevent it from doing harm. These duties as to harmful things cor respond to normal property rights, and

under the exceptions than under the duties. The duty not to make fraudulent misrepresentations corresponds to all

some of them to rights of life and bodily security.

GENERAL DUTIES OF INTENTION

are subject to so many and important exceptions that more actual cases fall

rights except that of reputation, in cluding the right of pecuniary condition. Nearly the same is true of the duty not to begin or carry on a malicious prose cution.

A person must not do any act with

Duties not to publish libels and slan

,an intention to cause thereby an effect

ders correspond to the right of reputa

that

will

be

in

fact

a

violation

of

.another’s right of life, bodily or mental

tion; perhaps the duty as to malicious prosecutions does also.