Intentional Torts Flashcards
Two Definitions of Intent
- A desire to cause a contact
2. Knowledge that a contact is substantially certain to result from doing the thing
Explain Garret v. Dailey
Court held: since the child was well aware of what happens when you pull a chair out from under someone, he must have been substantially certain that pulling the chair out from under his elderly aunt would cause her to make a contact with the ground
Are children capable of intent?
Yes, children are capable of intent but not infants. The age is subjective and varies with jurisdiction
Single v. Dual Intent
- Single intent is only the intent to cause a contact. One doesn’t need to intend for the contact to cause harm
- Dual intent means that one must both intend to make a contact and for that contract to cause harm
Does a mistake regarding the identify of the plaintiff vitiate intent?
No, mistake as to the identify of the one on the receiving end of the contact does not vitiate intent.
Explain Ranson v. Kitner
Court held that the defendant had intended to shoot the plaintiffs dog even though he believed in good faith that the dog was a wolf while they were on a hunting trip
Does insanity/mental illness vitiate intent?
No, public policy requires that we hold the mentally ill liable for intentional torts, we would rather put the burden on the one’s who committed the act as opposed to the plaintiff
Explain Mcguire v. Almy
Court that held that a mentally insane patient had committed the intentional torts of assault and battery when she verbally threatened to kill a nurse and then hit her with the leg of a chair
Does intoxication vitiate intent?
Absolutely not
Does unexpected incapacitation negate liability for intentional torts?
Usually yes, but the incapacitation must truly be unexpected and unforeseeable
Explain Cohen v. Petty
A car driver suddenly fell ill at the wheel, passed out, crashed the car, and the passengers sued for battery claiming that the driver was substantially certain getting behind the wheel would lead to this result. Court held that the driver had no possible way of knowing he would suddenly and unforeseeable fall ill at the will, thus the unexpected incapacitation negates any intentional tort liability. There still could be a negligence claim, however.
Does intent transfer? If so, explain how
- Intent transfers between the original 5 trespass torts (assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to land, trespass to chattels)
- Intent also transfers between individuals
Explain how intent transferred in Talmage v. Smith
Smith intended to throw a stick and hit boy A, but the stick hits boy B instead. Even though Smith never actually intended to hit boy B, the intent to hit boy A transferred once the stick hit boy B
What are the elements of battery?
- Intent to cause a contact
- Contact must be harmful or offensive and must be unconsented to
- Contact must be of the plaintiff’s person or effects
Explain the distinction between a gentle touch and a battery from Wallace v. Rosen
In Rosen, the court held that the defendant had not committed a battery when they tapped the plaintiff on the shoulder to get their attention during a school fire drill.
In determining whether a contact is battery or just a gentle touch, consider if the contact would be “offensive to an ordinary person not unduly sensitive as to personal dignity”
In a battery, does the contact have to be between the bodies of the plaintiff and the defendant?
No, not necessarily.
- Blowing smoke in someone’s face knowing they are allergic to it - battery
- Snatching a ten dollar-bill from someone’s hand - battery
- Stealing a package out of a suspected shoplifter’s hand and opening it - battery
Explain Fisher v. Carousel Motor Hotel
Court found defendant liable for battery after he grabbed a plate out of the plaintiff’s hand and uttered a racial slur at him in public.
If the defendant makes a contact with an object intrinsically connected to the plaintiffs person, such as a hat or an object held in their hand, this may be a battery. Consider whether the action would offend an ordinary person’s sense of “personal dignity”
What are the elements of assault?
- Intent to cause an apprehension or anticipation of a contact
- The apparent present ability of the defendant to cause the contact
- A threatening gesture (usually) from the defendant that causes
- Well-founded (reasonable) anticipation of an unconsented imminent contact
How do you determine if a defendant had the apparent ability to make a contact in an assault cause of action? Remember Western Union v. Hill
There is a reasonableness standard for determining whether a defendant actually had the apparent ability to make a contact.
In Hill, the court determined that the man behind the counter at a clock repair shop had the apparent ability to reach over and make a contact with the plaintiff, even if the evidence showed that he was a few feet too far away to “actually” make a contact. Still assault because the plaintiff reasonably believed the man could reach her.
In an assault cause of action, when must the contact be anticipated to occur?
The anticipated contact must be imminent. Future threats are not assault. Conditional threats may or may not be assault depending on the circumstances:
“move out of the way or I’ll punch you” - likely assault
“you have three days to move out of my town or else I’m gonna take care of you” - not assault
What is the words alone rule when taking about assault?
Words alone are not enough to constitute assault but instead need an accompanying gesture
Saying “I’m gonna kill you” with no gesture - probably not assault
Reaching into your pocket while in an argument - probably not assault
saying I’m gonna kill you while reaching into your pocket during an argument - probably assault
What are the elements of false imprisonment?
- An intent to confine another
- The confinement was unconsented and within boundaries fixed by the defendant, with no reasonable exit
- The defendant used unreasonable force, threat of force, or false assertion of authority to do the confining
- The plaintiff must have knowledge of the confinement or (in some jurisdictions) the resulting harm
Classic example of false imprisonment - Big Town Nursing v. Newman
Nursing home forbids resident to leave, locks him up in a ward, doesn’t let him make any phone calls)
Explain awareness of the confinement in a false imprisonment cause of action - Paris v. City of Kingston
Awareness at the time of confinement is enough, even if a plaintiff can’t remember afterwards
In a false imprisonment cause of action, what does it mean to have a reasonable exit - Hardy v. LaBelles Distributing Co.
Reasonable exit means that you can physically leave the premises without harm to life or limb, and you are not under threat of force to stay
In Hardy, there was no false imprisonment just because the plaintiff felt compelled to stay, she had a reasonable and safe exit (the door to the office) but chose not to leave
Give an example where exercising legal authority is improper with regards to false imprisonment - Enright v. Groves
Court held that defendant police officer falsely imprisoned the plaintiff when he arrested her after she refused to produce her drivers license. This wasn’t a traffic stop and there was no legal obligation for her to produce the license. Thus, false imprisonment when he took her to jail
In a false imprisonment claim, does the confinement have to be four walls with a door? Are there other types of confinement - Whitaker v. Sanford
Confinement does not necessarily have to be four walls with a locked door. The fact that it’s implausible for the plaintiff to leave may be grounds for false imprisonment
In Sanford, defendant refused to let woman off a boat that was parked in harbor. She was not physically restrained from leaving, but she would have to swim a great distance to get to shore, thus it was an abstract form of false imprisonment.
What the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)
- Intention (or recklessness) to cause emotional distress
- Defendant’s extreme and outrageous conduct
- Which caused the plaintiff to experience
- Severe emotional distress
How do you show that the emotional distress was severe in an IIED cause of action - Harris v. Jones
A general rule of thumb to determine if the distress was severe: ask if no reasonable person could be expected to endure it
Physical manifestations of the emotional distress are another way to prove that it’s severe
In Harris, the plaintiff threw up, fell ill, and missed work for several days because of threatened by his union
How do mere verbal insults factor into a claim for IIED - Slocum v. Food Stores
Mere insults are not enough for IEED. The test is whether the words or conduct would cause sever emotional distress to a person of ordinary sensibilities, in the absence of special knowledge
In Slocum, defendant had not committed IIED after he insulted the plaintiff in his store and the plaintiff had a heart attack. The heart-attack was related to pre-existing conditions and a person of reasonable sensibilities could handle the comments the defendant made. Defendant also had no reason to know of the woman’s special sensibilities, so no IIED.
