Teaching the Law School Curriculum - Institute for Law Teaching ...

Torts 373
I come up to you. I am looking really grouchy about something, and I punch you. Have I committed a tort? [response
and discussion]
What if I go to punch you, you duck, and I hit the person beside you? Have I committed a tort? [response and
discussion]
What if it turns out that we’re in the boxing ring, we’re professional boxers, and I hit you. Have I committed a
tort? [response and discussion]
What if we’re boxing and I hit you, and I intended that you be just injured, but instead of you being just injured,
I knock you out and you die? Ignore that there might be criminal law consequences. Have I committed a tort? [response
and discussion]
Let’s try another example. Who else doesn’t know anything about torts? [response]
Assume that you grab me and lock me in a broom closet because you really just don’t want to come to Torts
class. Have you committed a tort? [response and discussion]
What if you’re a little less-violent a soul, and you just stand in the door of the classroom and don’t let me in?
Have you committed a tort? [response and discussion]
I find this introduction works really well. These examples involve intentional torts, but it is easy to adjust the
exercise to use negligence or different intentional torts. As students answer each question, I give them the “short”
answer — whether it is a tort or not — and some elaboration where it’s not clear. In an amazing number of cases
they are right. They are guessing, of course, and they do not really know what a tort is. But we have fun. And
they are participating right at the outset. They also get to see that I am not going to be upset when answers are
wrong, as long as we’re trying to uncover something about the law.
Exercise for First Day of Torts
Kim Brooks, Queen’s University Faculty of Law
On the first day of Torts, especially if it is taught in the first semester of law school, I find it helpful to give students
assistance in seeing the big picture, in placing into context the bits and pieces about tort law that they have
picked up before law school, and in appreciating the continuing validity of all the old cases in the intentional
torts chapters with which most casebooks begin. This exercise takes a contemporary lawsuit (facts taken from
the opinion on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim) based on old precedent. It is designed
for the purposes mentioned, to serve as an ice breaker (since the class works together in smaller groups
and then comes back together to share information), and to underline two of the themes of my course: lawyering
is a problem-solving process and a process that benefits from collaborative work styles.
I allocate the entire first class to this exercise. The posted assignment for the first class is “Read pages 1–16 (of
Prosser, Wade, & Schwartz’s Torts 10th ed. Foundation Press 2000) for background and historical development
and to prepare for an in-class exercise on Monday. We will not go over these cases in class.” That chapter gives
some background on intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability but, frankly, I think the exercise can be done
without any background reading. On the first day, after a brief introduction of myself, I distribute the problem
that follows, which fits on one side of a piece of paper, and give the students 10 minutes to read it and make notes
in response to it. Then, I break them into groups of from five to eight and ask them to work together for 15 minutes
to answer the questions. After that, we spend 20 minutes getting reports from the groups about the issues
they focused on. I write the issues on the board, making some comments and adding coherence as I go along.
Then I spend about 10 minutes filling in the gaps, explaining how each of the issues they raised will fit into our
course of study during the semester, and making my point about collaboration. (This is done by asking them to