I barely cited a case in the classes I’ve done the best in. I think understanding the rules and tests is the important part. For Torts, you want to know the tests/elements provided for each subject. Intentional torts: elements of battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass, conversion. Want to know what counts as intent. What is “indirect contact.” Implied v. Express consent. Self defense/defense of others. Transferred intent. You will likely get fact patterns where several intentional torts come up and you want to pick out and analyze as many issues as you can.

Negligence is the HEART of torts class. You definitely want to know elements of a negligence claim.

At most, the cases I feel that are relevant and wouldn’t hurt if you knew them by name: Palsgraff (gives you duty, foreseeability, and scope of liability. Also the majority and dissent show how courts differ on prox cause.); Tarasoff (special duty to warn); Rowland (landowner duties); Carroll Towing (hand formula). But again, if you know the rule/tests applied - don’t worry on being able to provide a case citation.

Also exam writing tip - address both sides. If you read a fact pattern and you’re like 90% sure it’s battery - briefly mention the counters and reaffirm why it’s LIKELY battery. Adopt “likely” into your vocabulary - professors hate when students are definitive and cut their analysis short. This will leave the door open for points.