Defenses to intentional torts Flashcards
What does consent constitute in a game?
One who enters a sport, game, or contest may be taken to consent to physical contact consistent with the understood rules of the game. It is only when notice is given that all such conduct will no longer be tolerated that the defendant is no longer free to assume consent. (McQuiggan v. Boy Scouts of America) HOWEVER, may seek recovery only if the plaintiff did not expressly or impliedly agree to the harmful contact (football coach case)
what does consent constitute in a sexual relationship?
Consent to sexual intercourse is not the equivalent of consent to be infected with a venereal disease (exception if the party neither knew about the risks nor should have known. case McPherson v. McPherson).
When are you not justified in using a dangerous weapon in self-defense?
if the attacking party: (1) is not armed or (2) attacks in a manner that is not inherently dangerous to life. However, the use of a dangerous weapon to repel an attack is justified if an individual is in fear of an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death. Under the rule, it is only necessary that the actor have grounds on which a reasonable man would similarly believe that the use of a dangerous weapon is necessary to repel an assailant. (Slayton v. McDonald case)
when is a defense of others justified? and how is it proven?
-provided the force the individual used was not in excess of that necessary or reasonable under the circumstances. Often, a defendant who has a well-grounded belief that an assault upon a family member is imminent may use such force as is necessary to prevent the assault.
(Young v. Warren).
How is the defense of property analyzed?
A defendant claiming self-defense or defense of property to a charge of assault or battery must show that he used reasonable force not intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to fend off a perceived imminent harmful or offensive bodily contact (Woodard v. Turnipseed). In no event can force designed to cause death or serious bodily injury be used to justify the protection of mere property rights
Is excessive force justified for defending property?
A person, in protecting his property, may not use force calculated to cause death or serious bodily injury, except where there is also a threat to personal safety that is sufficient to justify self-defense (Katko case).
